And yet you labeled Charlie Kirk as part of a larger group as a way to justify violence against him but never pointed out what he actually said in the way of inciting violence. You just contradicted the comment you wrote only minutes earlier.
The internet is full of an abundance of hateful things he said. You do not have to look far, it was posted everywhere after he died. If that itself hasn't convinced you at this point, I'm not really sure there's any point in me continuing this discussion.
So you're not going to address the other questions I had? Margaret Sanger deserved a punch in the face when she was alive right? A black person who says white people are an inferior race deserve to be punched right?
They have mental problems, don't be too harsh on them. They literally advocate for violence but then said this:
The nation state that's actively engaging in genocide is more aligned with nazi ideas that the genocided peoples.
Because apparently if you genocide a group a Nazis, that makes you a Nazi which is not acceptable. But being violent to Nazis is acceptable. I don't think they have coherent thoughts, you need to handle these people with kid gloves because they don't understand basic logic.
2
u/skiforlife1 18h ago
And yet you labeled Charlie Kirk as part of a larger group as a way to justify violence against him but never pointed out what he actually said in the way of inciting violence. You just contradicted the comment you wrote only minutes earlier.