See? 
I think it’s really interesting that, when confronted with evidence of a really problematic statement, the response is not to change one’s mind based on the evidence, but to re-classify that evidence as a “joke” and dismiss it.
A “joke” which is:
- not funny
- uses Biblical wording
- is, indeed, seriously advocated in some of the US religious community
Ockham’s razor again—it’s an uphill argument to see “submit to your husband” as a joke.
It’s fascinating the lengths people will go to in order to avoid challenging their pre-existing beliefs. Also scary.
It’s fascinating that some people are too chickenshit to have an argument and like to pretend it is not worth their time but then they will snipe from the sidelines and look for accolades while pretending they totally want to argue in good faith if only they would let them. I wonder if this has been studied before.
Can you explain Charlie Kirks’ position on empathy. In my view empathy is the basic teaching of Jesus Christ.
If this is directed at me, I’m interested in the thread and the issues brought up here, and conservative perspectives, but I have chosen not to interact with you directly because the games you are playing here are really quite annoying.
I’m saying this now just to be clear: I will not be drawn into a discussion or debate with you. You can call me all the names you like.
To those of you who follow the news media, a question: Now that the carnival of Kirk worship had its big televised performance (complete with fireworks, oh, my!), have you seen a lessening of the obsessive media coverage of all things Charlie? Has it begun to fade into the background dull roar of ongoing chaos? Or is the horse not quite dead yet? I don’t pay enough attention to news to know.
The words said by Charlie Kirk:
So the new communications strategy for Democrats, now that their polling advantage is collapsing in every single state… collapsing in Ohio. It’s collapsing even in Arizona. It is now a race where Blake Masters is in striking distance. Kari Lake is doing very, very well. The new communications strategy is not to do what Bill Clinton used to do, where he would say, “I feel your pain.” Instead, it is to say, “You’re actually not in pain.” So let’s just, little, very short clip. Bill Clinton in the 1990s. It was all about empathy and sympathy. I can’t stand the word empathy, actually. I think empathy is a made-up, new age term that — it does a lot of damage. But, it is very effective when it comes to politics. Sympathy, I prefer more than empathy. That’s a separate topic for a different time.
Is this what you would like to discuss? What about it? Can you elaborate?
At the Charlie Kirk memorial, much was made of the importance of Christianity. A lack of empathy is counter to Christs’ teaching. How can Charlie Kirks’ teachings be considered Christian.
Do people really think this is a legitimate criticism of CK? That he is a hypocrite for saying this because he is Christian? Maybe it’s just you. I don’t think this is an argument to be taken seriously to be honest.
And please be more careful quoting me. I know you didn’t mean to do that but it seems like I am saying those words, not Charlie Kirk.
That’s an interesting response but it avoids the issue. Of course this is my position and it is addressed to you in the context of this forum.
Please address the issue: how can Charlie Kirk reject empathy and be considered Christian?
“It was just a joke” is what middle school asshole bullies say when they are called out by the teacher for being asshole bullies.
It is not believable. It’s a lazy, bullshit, pathetic, childish excuse. The asshole knows it, we know it, everyone knows it’s bullshit.
@Crane didn’t quote anybody that I can see. What are you talking about?
You’re not very good at this, are you?
" I don’t think this is an argument to be taken seriously to be honest."
This is something a high school debate coach would tell you to never, ever say during a debate, because it would guarantee a loss. It reveals with startling clarity that you have no response whatsoever to a good point that was made.
The NYT still has several related stories on its front page, but I expect by next week we’ll be on to a new outrage. The ‘Tylenol causes autism!’ thing is going to stick for a bit, I think.
In any case, the Epstein files seem to have dropped from notice.
More pro-Kirk fanaticism going on: School board member ousted after gardening post misinterpreted as Charlie Kirk attack - Raw Story A woman posts a bit about gardening, and the pro-Kirk mob react like a pack of wild dogs, misinterpreting it as an anti-Kirk attack.
If you do a search in Google News, you’ll see there’s still plenty of large media outlets talking about it.
This particular story looks promising!
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/09/23/epstein-files-discharge-arizona-election-00575894
Speaker Mike Johnson is about to confront one of his biggest leadership tests yet, courtesy of voters in southwest Arizona.
They are highly likely to elect a new Democratic House member in a special election Tuesday. That would-be lawmaker, Adelita Grijalva, told POLITICO she plans to become the 218th and clinching supporter of a bipartisan effort to force public disclosure of federal investigative files related to the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
I’d really like to see your position on this issue.
Oh, they’ve got a solid dozen hitting the hook every single time. They’re really fucking good.