Charlie Kirk chose to be a racist, xenophobic, sexist, authoritarian, Christian nationalist, anti-LGBTIA hate-mongering bigot who promoted violence against his enemies. His last words before being murdered exemplified the horrific far-right political rhetoric that he used his movement to spread to young people with under developed critical thinking skills. Kirk definitely lacked those skills as well as evidenced by his attempts to debate intelligent people who disagreed with him. Kirk’s intention was to help usher in a white nationalist Christofascist government that would scapegoat and target BIPOC communities, queer people, immigrants, non-Christians, and Christians who believe that Christian nationalism is wrong. He chose evil. He chose wealth and power. He chose white supremacy. He chose violence. He chose those things despite the fact that Jesus told us to reject all of them.

While all of the above is demonstrably true and easily verifiable, none of it means that Kirk should have been murdered in cold blood. The shooter, at the time of writing this, remains at large, their identity and motives unknown. That predictably has not stopped far-right commentators and politicians from spouting hatred and calls for violence against “the left.” As John Fugelsang said last night during the God Squad segment, the far-right only care about violence like this when they can exploit it for power.

In the aftermath of the murder, I felt scared about the potential for right-wing violence towards the communities that Kirk shouted so loud to vilify. As I searched social media for news, I saw many people applauding the murder of Charlie Kirk, making jokes about “thoughts and prayers,” stating that violence should be used against people like Kirk because that’s what he deserved, or that non-violence doesn’t work as a response to fascists. Those responses, like those of people like Stewart Rhodes and Anna Paulina, are wrong. As early Christian church father Tertullian said, “It is absolutely forbidden to repay evil with evil.” Redemptive violence, in my opinion is evil, as is retributive violence. Both of them appear to have led to the murder of Kirk.

There has to be a better way. As human beings, we have used violence in attempts to create order, to resolve conflicts, to gain power, to get revenge or retribution, and to further causes. Has it ever actually worked? Has using violence ever truly led to peace? From where I am sitting, all I can see is that violence creates more violence. We cannot defeat ideas with bullets. Nazism still exists despite the horrors of World War II. The bombs and bullets did not eradicate it. African American public theologian Lisa Sharon Harper stated in a Facebook post after the news of Kirk’s murder broke that, “Charlie Kirk was not my enemy. His ideas were my enemy.” Murdering Kirk does nothing to dismantle his hateful ideology. It has already turned him into a martyr for those who followed him.

I admit that I often struggle to have empathy and compassion for people like Kirk, Trump, Hegseth, or Epstein. Kirk, and many Christian nationalists, incorrectly believe that empathy is a sin. Yet, according to anthropologist Margaret Mead, empathy and compassion were the earliest signs of human civilization to be discovered. Similarly, political theorist and philosopher Hannah Arendt believed that without empathy humanity will descend into barbarism. I agree. Thus, I have empathy for Kirk’s wife and children, and take absolutely no pleasure in the fact that he was murdered regardless of what I think about his awful, hate-filled legacy.

It is hard to see anything good coming from the murder of Kirk. His movement and the broader MAGA movement has long been clamoring for violence and has previously shown that it wouldn’t hesitate to use it as they did on January 6, 2021. Similarly, those who rejoice in the murder and believe that Kirk had it coming, could be close to losing their empathy, which as seen is a perilous path for anyone to tread. We can and must tell the truth about who Kirk chose to be and refuse to engage in the kind of “both-sides” nonsense that Gavin Newsom posted on social media. There was nothing laudable about Kirk’s fascist beliefs or the manner in which he “debated” his ideas. That said, we must strive, however difficult it is to do so, to see the humanity in Kirk, lest we lose our own.

Screenshot quotes from: https://jasonporterfield.com/40-quotes-from-the-early-church-on-violence-and-enemy-love/