• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Punishing people who trivialize or downplay Charlie Kirk's death

Should people who trivialize or downplay Charlie Kirk's death be punished?

  • Total voters
    92
TheDoctorWasIn said:
Not at all. I support my position in good faith - Charlie Kirk was a fascist shithead, and the world is better without him in it.

That's the thing - the best way to "trigger" you guys is with facts.
Click to expand...

:ROFLMAO: Crawfish impersonation. You should have kept with your theme of doing it to trigger people, make them "big mad" and all that.

Yeah...facts. Why do they look like your opinion?
 
Phys251 said:
Should people who trivialize or downplay Charlie Kirk's death be punished? If so, how?
Click to expand...
Question: What kind of person derives pleasure from watching pain and suffering of others nightly on ABC, NBC and CBS News ?

Answer: A Sadist
 
Phys251 said:
Should people who trivialize or downplay Charlie Kirk's death be punished? If so, how?
Click to expand...
Depends on the situation. People who work in public such as teachers, and people who work for companies who have social media policies, should know better and could certainly be held accountable. Saying someone deserves to be shot for their opinions basically reveals that person to be a psychopath.
 
Allan said:
You voted 'yes' that people who trivialize or downplay Charlie Kirk's death be punished, and said they should be punished in this manner...



Maybe you should change your vote.
Click to expand...

There is no “other” option, so I voted yes and clarified the level which I thought was deserving of (limited) consequences.
 
BeckyJ said:
So...it was the word the author of the post chose to use. I gave my opinion on that.
Click to expand...
I said your vote is in conflict with your comment,
BeckyJ said:
Whatever the boss, company, school, etc decides. It won't be a shot through the neck, so whatever it is, the person will still be alive, which is more than they think Kirk deserved.
Click to expand...
So again, you are fine with teachers being fired for exercising their 1A rights.
You do understand that is unconstitutional.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
It’s far more limited than Charlie Kirk’s or his wife’s and kid’s consequences.
Click to expand...
But we're not talking about Kirk's widow and their children.

We're talking about whether those who "trivialize or downplay" Kirk's murder should be punished.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
I said your vote is in conflict with your comment,

So again, you are fine with teachers being fired for exercising their 1A rights.
You do understand that is unconstitutional.
Click to expand...
No it's not.
Sure, the Constitution gives us free speech, it says nothing about the consequences of that free speech.
No it's not, they were free to say what they did or not and those who are not tolerating their free speech, even though they were free to say it, are dealing with it how they see fit. If they are fired, well atleast they're still alive unlike the guy they are celebrating his death. So they'll be fine.
If you're so worried about them, seek them out and assist them if they get fired, etc.
 
Old 'N Chill said:

trivialize or downplay.............NOT celebrate or condone​

That's your first mistake, second one is wanting people to be punished for expressing their personal opinions. This is still America, you know.
Click to expand...
Trivialize or downplay probably not…definitely no criminal charges for anything that someone says but I think we all know that you gotta be careful what you post online these days as future or current employers may see it…anyone that employs you in a right to work state has the right to fire you for whatever reason they like and so that’s a risk you’re taking with anything you post online I would say
 
BeckyJ said:
No it's not.
Sure, the Constitution gives us free speech, it says nothing about the consequences of that free speech.
No it's not, they were free to say what they did or not and those who are not tolerating their free speech, even though they were free to say it, are dealing with it how they see fit. If they are fired, well atleast they're still alive unlike the guy they are celebrating his death. So they'll be fine.
If you're so worried about them, seek them out and assist them if they get fired, etc.
Click to expand...
Post #96

"Sure, the Constitution gives us free speech, it says nothing about the consequences of that free speech."

Do you support the Government's attaching "consequences" to those who have joked about Kirk's murder or celebrated his death?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom