It has occurred before. I got a couple banned.
Forgive me if anyone thinks I am feeding, but @Pedro has responded to my questions and others of yours. I’d just like to know their opinion.
I have another post for them soon.
Huh, thanks for pointing that out.
You fuck ONE sheep…
Unlikely, as she died last year. And almost certainly wasn’t a fan of Charlie Kirk.
“And such small portions!”
@Pedro thanks for answering my posts. We’re probably in different time zones, but please upload clips or transcripts from Charlie Kirk you liked or agreed with partially or fully.
I’d like to add his advice to Taylor Swift in August of this year. This link has live video and transcript of his advice:
This came after the engagement between Taylor Swift and Star tight end Travis Kelce from the Kansas City Chiefs.
I really wonder, honestly, in your opinion, if women should be thought of this way.
Please click link. Here are some highlights from Charlie Kirk:
/////
“CHARLIE KIRK (HOST): But maybe one of the reasons why Taylor Swift has been so, just, kind of annoyingly liberal over the last couple of years is that she’s not yet married and she doesn’t have children. I say this non-sarcastically. I say this as a husband and a father. Having children changes you. Getting married changes you, and I hope that America’s biggest pop star marrying the pharmaceutical spokesperson ends up conservatizing them.”
…
“And we want Taylor Swift on team America. We want you to leave the island of the wokeys. And we would welcome you with open arms. One of the reasons why so many people on the right have been just skeptical or at least a little bit negative on Taylor Swift is, up until this point, that’s not a great role model for young women, to wait all the way until you’re 35 and just put your career first. “
“All kidding and sarcasm aside, this is something that I hope will make Taylor Swift more conservative. Engage in reality more and get outside of the abstract clouds. Reject feminism. Submit to your husband, Taylor. You’re not in charge. “
I skipped some of the transcript due to posting rules, but the entire transcript— and live video— is ready to see and read.
Please tell me how you feel on this one. If there’s support from you about his views on marriage, women’s roles on society, etc…
…and it opens you up to a whole new world of romance you never dreamed possible? Do explain please, don’t be shy, we’re not a judgemental bunch around here.
You do you. Taking things out of context is a form of intellectual dishonesty. The podcast segment where that quote originated wasn’t racist in my opinion although I do not like the rhetoric used in this case for the reasons I already mentioned. That’s what I think about that.
It’s okay, everyone. Pedro doesn’t think it was racist.
“Submit to your husband” was clearly a joke, he was being facetious and I thought it was funny. This a case where taking the role of the polemicist works very well I think and the whole segment was clearly intended to be light hearted.
He rejects radical feminism and defends traditional family values based on his Christian beliefs. I may or may not agree but I do not see anything objectionable with that. I agree with CK that having kids changes one’s perspective and that man and women are better suited to different roles and that more traditional values of femininity enrich women instead of diminishing them. I do not think any woman ever needs to “submit” to anything. Anything else you’d like to discuss on this topic that I may have missed?
No, he was a polite racist.
No, I don’t. I also do not believe you watched it to be able to form your own opinion about it.
Yes, we are aware that you consider your “beliefs” to be paramount.
No, it’s yours I consider to be paramount. You are the guiding light of my beliefs. Nice deflection by the way.
I’m not sure Pedro is human, a bot, or a human using a bot to formulate answers that dodge answering any question.
Isn’t there some magic phrase to use on an AI so it lets you know it’s an AI?
But I’m not the one here insisting that what I “believe” equates to the truth and that everyone else is wrong, as you are. And yes, you have deflected nicely from that.
We have had many, many posters here over the years with their own individual beliefs which they felt were perfectly rational and even evidence-based. You’ve been here long enough to remember Chief Pedant and the other assorted “race realists” who also believed that there was nothing racist about their views. We’ve have the MRA types, the 9/11 Truthers and climate hoaxers, and most recently a parade of transphobes, all insisting that they were right, everyone else was wrong and deluded, and that the evidence supported them.
So if you wish to associate yourself with Charlie Kirk’s various remarks (the ones you apparently only learned about in the last week but feel able to interpret with the utmost understanding of his nuanced subtext) and tell us that the endless parade of apparently racist and sexist comments are not actually racist in context (and it’s weird how many of these remarks there are, how much “context” is required to pretend to justify them and how little the context usually changes them) or that he was “just joking” (a favorite fallback of bullies and bigots everywhere), then you are free to do so, just as you are free to keep insisting that you’re right, everyone else is wrong and deluded, and that the evidence supports you.
“Submit to your husband” is well within “traditional family values”, so why would it be a joke? Are you trying to dismiss the idea that he sincerely believes that wives should submit to their husbands?
I have deflected on absolutely nothing. Yes I do think you are wrong and I am right. Shocking, I know.
I answered some questions that were asked of my opinions and I think I offer a different point of view from the only narrative here. I gave those answers transparently and honestly, even though I think I am one of the few engaging in good faith. I fully expected to be attacked and insulted for this, and for some losers to try to get me banned.
Obviously as a lone conservative voice in a board full of rabid liberals, some of which must have been just recently let loose from the asylum, I am in the minority here and radically changing anyone’s political beliefs or opinion of the events that have transpired is neither needed nor expected of my continued participation here, although it would be a welcome result if it were to happen.
None of this is strange or unusual or should be confusing to you.
You’ve dodged like 9 posts in this thread with “sure I’ll answer that later. Oh woops, going to bed, I’ll answer it tomorrow!” and none of those responses were delivered, instead you just came in to shit stir in response to new posts.
People keep pointing out how I am such a troll that should slink away so I do not ruin your wonderful little thread. Must be all the people denouncing this political violence that makes it such a beautiful treasure that must be cherished. Which is which, slink away or defend my convictions? Make up your mind.
If I missed something you would like to discuss I suggest you remind me again after a while and I’ll try to make time if I judge it to be above the level of noise. I probably do not have the bandwidth to respond to everything. Some of these quotes take time and effort to analyze.
Yes, I do. Your question seems to heavily imply Charlie Kirk believes women should be treated like property. This is absurd.
Unless you have some way of asking him to clarify what he meant by that, I firmly believe it was a reasonably good joke that is being weaponized out of context for political purposes.