Oh Jesus he is cooked

And yet they could not have possibly known that eating the fruit was bad until after they did, further proving God is just a sadist.

I didn’t know I could watch the same piece of shit get murdered twice, but here we are.

holy shit, stop he’s already dead, you don’t need to keep going.

Charlie was not doing debates. He was a propagandist. What he did was performing in the shape of a debate, in front of an audience to spread his agenda, and he was very good at that. If you scrutinize his “debates” in terms of logic soundness or other things good arguments would have, they don’t stand a chance. But that was not the point, nor would it matter.

I think his debates were actually very well done. It’s just that debates are not a good format to find truth. Charlie was one of the best at debates. Saying all that, we all should be better at being on other platforms and sniping these clips to highlight the hypocrisy and bullshit. I’m absolutely convinced that right wing groups convinced all of us to abandon all other social media so they can spread their ideas easier

Ha ha!

Cremated, even

Though this is hilariously funny, this is the list basic argument against just about any religion, the cherry picking, and I’m still waiting for a fucking answer. Why doesn’t Charlie burn himself to death? I mean, I can imagine that that hole in his neck makes that hard to do for him right now, but why doesn’t he? Why doesn’t every Christian out there burn and stone themselves to death for their continuous sinning?

Or if not, you know, admit that they’re plain wrong about their entire view on life?

Charlie Kirk would have called Jesus a communist.

Depends on what you think debate is, I guess. After posting my comment I did realize people probably conceptualise “debate” differently. If you think debate is just a form of performance to influence people’s ideas, then sure. But if you think debate should be a form of intellectual conversation, a collaboration between two disagreeing parties in order to find truth, then what Charlie is doing couldn’t be further from that.

Voltaire never said that.

It’s both. But the techniques Charlie used were excellent. Debate should be done in good faith. He wasn’t debating in good faith. But the skills he had to still do what he did was phenomenal. I have no issue with his ability to use debate strategies. We could all learn something from watching him.

yeah idk who “they” are specifically (i know in some state/city, they want the 10 commandments in schools), but I doubt they are a religious group that believes in all of the old testament, which means you make a very good point.

I feel in this case, it just “proves them right” . Your 5 year old won’t begin to use silence as a sign that they’re right and spread videos of that debate to thousands of people.

Then crucified him and blame the Muslims…

Ironically enough, this shows how Kirk was actually at least somewhat better than most of the right wing pundits.

He would actually allow others to have the mic. He actually lets the dude speak. If not for that, you couldn’t have a video of him being made to look the fool.

Most of them will refuse to interact, shouting down questions, trying to cut off counterpoints, only interacting via one-way streams and speeches. Generally cowardly refusing to vaguely risk a difficult talking point arise.

He said vile things, but he at least let others speak. And now the right wing is on a crusade to try to suppress any voice that would have stood against, rather than letting them speak.