One of the most peaceful, respectful, reasonable, conservative and Christian voices of his generation was brutally shot today for simply holding event where those who disagreed with him were free to engage in respectful conversation.
The amount of glee coming from the left as well as the DFL refusal to take a moment of silence/prayer for Kirk is deeply disturbing.
At this point, beyond the incivility of many on the left, this isn't and shouldn't be political right now. I appreciate the accolades from those he'd interacted with who didn't agree with him.
5 comments:
He has been every bit as important to how conservatives should respond to the left as was Andrew Breitbart. And he's done so with grace and happiness which one would think would have universal appeal. Sadly, we saw today that's not at all the case.
the very notion that someone who spent their time going into public spaces and having respectful conversations with those who disagree should be killed for that is absolutely insane. Those who celebrate, justify, or excuse the killer are simply beneath contempt.
At some point, I'll do a post on the celebration of his death by the left, but not now.
I'll simply note that, like Rush, Charlie was doing something that the left could not/cannot/would not do. The left surely could have attempted to find someone who could have done what Charlie did, but they didn't. I think that is telling. Given how upfront Charlie was about his faith, it doesn't seem inappropriate to call him a martyr as some are doing.
I don't think it's necessarily inappropriate to regard him as a martyr for conservatism or for America. I don't think he'd necessarily disapprove of such if the victim had been, say, Rush Limbaugh or Mark Levin...though I would wager he'd not regard himself as such.
Personally, I think that assassinated focus only on the political, while martyred brings the focus to his faith.
I'd wager that he's in the presence of YHWH right now and could care less about how he's referred to.
I would expect he is.
Post a Comment