Charlie Kirk Shot

[Praxis+Theodicy]

As a nonresistant Christian, I want to see peace reign in the world rather than violence. I believe that violence begets violence. I believe that Christ-like love is stronger than force.

Consequently, I am glad if someone loses their job for being appreciative of violence.

Nonresistance, according to Jesus, is not only about violence. It also applies to forced labor (going the extra mile), and taking matters to court (go and settle things beforehand). I think depriving someone of their employment is an act of violence that we shouldn't celebrate any more than those people were celebrating the violence done to CK.

I've seen a big culture of resentment and a narrative of martyrdom arise among far-right groups in America because of people losing their jobs. I think it has done more harm than good that people are deprived of their jobs for matters of ideology or opinion, no matter how much I disagree with their opinion.

Beyond the Christian view, there is a lot of nuance to be applied. "Freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences" is very true. These people have NOT had their freedom of speech violated. Also, many who lost their job did so for very good reason, mainly that they had publoc-facing positions. One woman who wrote for a newspaper posted a celebratory post on social media. That is a VERY bad representation, and for her to lose her job is very understandable. For, say, a grocer at the local food store to lose their job over a similar post is another matter. Yes, people have been losing their jobs over this, but most of those people have jobs in which they have a duty to represent quality, ethical dialogue in the public sphere. Publically celebrating an assassination is a violation of that duty.

[Bootstrap]

"Freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences" is the slogan for a new cancel culture. Whether or not the person actually said what their accusers are claiming. And the "consequences" seem to involve doing whatever possible to destroy people's careers and lives without any kind of due process.

I do think people should be responsible for what they say. If I had an employee who celebrated Kirk's death, I would respond exactly the way Ernie would. But I am seeing a lot of things that look like real threats to the First Amendment. If people are afraid to speak, that limits their speech.

As strangers and aliens in this world, we should be careful what we wish for. There are "consequences" for Christians who speak out in many places. These things can be used against us too once they are in place.

[temporal1]

There’s a distnction between witnessing, accepting, respecting (just, nonviolent) consequences rather than celebratng.
Sober reflection isn’t joyful, it’s often a needed wakeup call to prevent worse. Informed prevention is a worthy goal.

I agree, much that happens shouldn’t be celebrated, response isn’t binary. Celebration shouldn’t be an automatic response.
A healthy human brain is capable of more.

i’m relieved to witness some of many sacred cows be questioned. The world had twisted itself into knots.

[Valerie]

"Freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences" is the slogan for a new cancel culture. Whether or not the person actually said what their accusers are claiming. And the "consequences" seem to involve doing whatever possible to destroy people's careers and lives without any kind of due process.

I do think people should be responsible for what they say. If I had an employee who celebrated Kirk's death, I would respond exactly the way Ernie would. But I am seeing a lot of things that look like real threats to the First Amendment. If people are afraid to speak, that limits their speech.

As strangers and aliens in this world, we should be careful what we wish for. There are "consequences" for Christians who speak out in many places. These things can be used against us too once they are in place.

I don’t think freedom of speech was ever meant to protect vile and threatening and influential chants and cries for the promotion of evil. This kind of hateful rhetoric was not imaginable to be a growing cancer at the time the first amendment was written. What was the speech “at the time” that there was a concern of being censored?

[temporal1]

I don’t think freedom of speech was ever meant to protect vile and threatening and influential chants and cries for the promotion of evil. This kind of hateful rhetoric was not imaginable to be a growing cancer at the time the first amendment was written. What was the speech “at the time” that there was a concern of being censored?

Rallying cries for felony crime and grave sin are pagan rituals. The internet has put it at scale for all to witness.
This is no small thing.

[Ernie]

As a nonresistant Christian, I want to see peace reign in the world rather than violence. I believe that violence begets violence. I believe that Christ-like love is stronger than force.

Consequently, I am glad if someone loses their job for being appreciative of violence.

Nonresistance, according to Jesus, is not only about violence. It also applies to forced labor (going the extra mile), and taking matters to court (go and settle things beforehand). I think depriving someone of their employment is an act of violence that we shouldn't celebrate any more than those people were celebrating the violence done to CK.

I've seen a big culture of resentment and a narrative of martyrdom arise among far-right groups in America because of people losing their jobs. I think it has done more harm than good that people are deprived of their jobs for matters of ideology or opinion, no matter how much I disagree with their opinion.

Beyond the Christian view, there is a lot of nuance to be applied. "Freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences" is very true. These people have NOT had their freedom of speech violated. Also, many who lost their job did so for very good reason, mainly that they had publoc-facing positions. One woman who wrote for a newspaper posted a celebratory post on social media. That is a VERY bad representation, and for her to lose her job is very understandable. For, say, a grocer at the local food store to lose their job over a similar post is another matter. Yes, people have been losing their jobs over this, but most of those people have jobs in which they have a duty to represent quality, ethical dialogue in the public sphere. Publically celebrating an assassination is a violation of that duty.

Yes, I agree that we should celebrate neither the harming of others nor someone losing their job for celebrating the harming of others. I think that celebration should only happen on matters that God is happy about... goodness, faith, love, mercy, etc.

[Soloist]

I don’t think freedom of speech was ever meant to protect vile and threatening and influential chants and cries for the promotion of evil. This kind of hateful rhetoric was not imaginable to be a growing cancer at the time the first amendment was written. What was the speech “at the time” that there was a concern of being censored?

Who is the judge of what is vile, threatening, evil?
You know there is strong disagreement as to what fits.

[temporal1]

I don’t think freedom of speech was ever meant to protect vile and threatening and influential chants and cries for the promotion of evil. This kind of hateful rhetoric was not imaginable to be a growing cancer at the time the first amendment was written. What was the speech “at the time” that there was a concern of being censored?

Who is the judge of what is vile, threatening, evil?
You know there is strong disagreement as to what fits.

A baseline is, 1) what is labeled felony crime in human law, and, 2) stated grave sin in scriptures.
For crimes that meet both descriptions, questions are alleviated, aren’t they? Example: murder

Personally, i don’t “celebrate” harsh punishments, like earned life in prison, i accept and respect difficult decisions.
That’s not celebrating. i don’t celebrate the death of osama bin laden. i accept the gov decision.

The word, celebrate is used too often. Too often to confuse, distort, to accuse; ultimately, to enable wrong.

Evil is cunning. Esp with words.

[JohnH]

If someone worked for me who celebrated an assassination*, and I found out, I would try to talk to them and discuss in Christian love why I can’t support assassinations, and work with them restoratively.

*Excluding support for the assassination of Osama bin Laden, which was universally celebrated at the time; technically I had a student worker who made a joke about it, and everyone laughed, because supporting assassinations of people designated by the Empire as an enemy is apparently OK.

[mike]

Trying to figure out who should be cancelled or fired for stuff they say is just standard fare from people with keyboards and microphones. It has been happening for years. Where it gets a little more interesting is when the government uses its power to shut down speech. One of the conservative podcasters spent half his show the other day trying to make a difference between "cancel culture" and calling for people to lose their jobs because of egregiously bad speech, and the other half criticizing the current head of the FCC for possibly using his powers to suppress speech, which is definitely going beyond just "cancel culture."