Mumsnet censorship

[anonymouselephantx]

Mumsnet has been deleting any comment at all that criticises Charlie Kirk... just because he has died does not mean he is infallible. He is still an evil person who did and said evil things, contributed to so much suffering of families at the hands of ICE etc., mocked the Palestinians undergoing a genocide? Mumsnet, disturbing much? I had to get MN by email to delete a thread of mine as I was getting bullied and people were making personal attacks against me (the talk guidelines say personal attacks will be deleted, yet I had to BEG for this), but they are censoring anything anyone says about Charlie Kirk? Why are we not allowed to have freedom of speech and freedom to debate, especially when it is someone who did and said SO MUCH EVIL!

Be better OP, just be better.

No she started a thread about Mumsnet deleting comments and censoring criticism of Charlie Kirk. If you don't want to read more about it because you find it vile, no one forced you to click or participate. All you're doing is further proving OPs point that people are being told to shut up or say something nice (about a man who thought so many of us were inherently inferior to his race and sex) .

.'All because of his sky fairy'

Sky fairy? Would you say that to a Muslim who was encouraging their beliefs within their community.

We can disagree with someone without mocking.

He was all of those things. I've seen plenty of good debates in my time, the point of debating is to discuss 2 conflicting views and I have no problem with that, however he didn’t debate, he just yelled incoherent nonsense across and was repeatedly whipped by kids half his age and 3 times smarter.

Regarding the rest, well, he was only shot dead mid way through a racist dog whistle. So yeah, if it talks like a duck and walks like a duck.

I would actually.

Too many people use religion for evil purposes and to control women and girls.

This man sounds like his views align with the Taliban.

'however he didn’t debate, he just yelled incoherent nonsense across and was repeatedly whipped by kids half his age and 3 times smarter.'

Hmm we mustve seen different things I've never seen him yell incoherent nonsense and he always seems to wipe the floor with purple faced shouting haters.

I wonder if he'll get a big state style funeral?

I'm off to do just that

On the Marriage issue - I totally agree with you - but my conservative christian relatives only understand the word "marriage" in a privileged way. Ordained by God, heterosexual etc. We can disagree with them all we like, and try to argue for a secular understanding of marriage as a social contract, but it will not change their deep seated belief that marriage should be reserved for heterosexual couples because it was ordained by god for the procreation of children. Oh and arguments about older, past child bearing, couples being able to marry carried no weight because "miracles happen" "look at Abraham and Sarah".... believe me, I know all the arguments. It still does not make those deeply conservative people evil. I think it makes them mistaken, but they are not evil and I do not believe CK was evil, mistaken on many issues yes, but not evil.

I was raised very catholic and have some staunchly Catholic relatives still so I understand the position of the deeply religious. Having said that, all of my deeply religious family members have religious values they hold themselves to - not others. They don't believe in imposing their religion on others who don't believe in it or that people should be denied their legal rights to do things in a secular country that is forbidden for them by their religion. Religion doesn't make people evil. Imposing your religious values on other people's life choices and wanting them to be subjugated below you, is evil though.

I’d imagine he will, based on how he travelled home today.

I made a point of watching his debates last night, some of them I’d seen before. I agreed, as expected, with very little that he said. But he said that stuff I didn’t agree with, with commitment and with his whole chest. He believed what he believed and he said it clearly. Everything he said, he had the data to back up.

Even where people were clearly getting the better of him, a medical student at Cambridge for example, he listened and responded without resorting to escalation.

I didn’t agree with his comments or ethos, I think some of what he said is at best controversial. But he had a right to say it, and dying for it is a step too far.

It became blindly obvious after a few updates that wasn’t why OP started this thread at all.

She wanted to spout hate about a man who’s just be murdered.

Yes I and others who find it vile could keep scrolling and ‘shut up’ as you put it….but isn’t that the irony, why should we have to shut up but people who agree with OP like yourself should keep on posting and quoting any of us who disagree?

Let's not cannonise him because he was assassinated.

Ask the people he set the MAGA faithful upon by putting them on his digital hit list about just how evil he was.

It's clearly wrong that someone shot him, even though he was a hate filled rascist cunt. A misogynistic cunt. A monster happy to stir up hatred and division for money and fame. Charlie was an all round pretty fucking terrible example of a human.

I cannot pour enough scorn of his acts or his words, he was scum, pondlife, slime.

But my words are just words and thats as far as disagreeing woth someoneshould go. I don't condone taking someone's life no matter how vile they were. And he was vile and he purposely sought to harm people. He just didn't use a gun, but I don't doubt that he would have been more than happy with MAGA followers that did.

A truly truly evil man. His untimely brutal death and Trump's crocodile tears, unwarranted awards to this dead man and the excessive media coverage he is receiving simply dont change that.

Just disgusting, why on earth spout all that toxic bile.

Just say you didn't agree with him, his values or his politics. That would suffice.

He was not an 'truly evil man'. Save that hysteria for the shooter.

Why do you say he’s not evil?

He said his 10 year old daughter should be forced to deliver a baby conceived through rape.

People are entitled to their opinions about him.

Saying you simply disagree isn’t strong enough if you believe that he stood for evil.

To be clear, I absolutely don’t agree with him.

But - he was midway through a debate on abortion, that he didn’t agree with. Had he basically said “I only agree with abortion if it’s my daughter,” his strength of conviction would have immediately fallen apart.

It’s obviously a disgusting idea that a 10 year should be in that position.

But he stuck by his beliefs, and was clearly happy to not be an exception to them.

People keep bringing up his gun views - I think he’d still have them, and he’s just been murdered.

If you’re going to have polarising and challenging views, at least stick to them.

That’s true. But then I’d say that imposing forced birth on any child is evil.

I think imposing forced ed birth on any woman is cruel and quite frankly no business at all of a man like Charlie Kirk.

He had no compassion for women and girls.

I obviously don't agree that a 10yr should have a baby but I'm not quite sure why that extremely unlikely scenario was put to him but what he answered doesn’t make him evil just wrong.

It's ok to say someone's opinions are wrong, a different view does not make him an evil cunt, scum or pondlife of whatever a rather dramatic pp labelled him.

I agree - there’s no disputing for most people that forcing a 10 year old to have a baby is disgusting - tbf it was a fictional event in the context of that conversation.

He believed so strongly in his view that he at least claimed he’d stick to it even in those circumstances.

I don’t like his views, but I can acknowledge his commitment to them. I’d almost sooner that than some wishy washy popularist who changes their mind like the wind.

It’s not an extremely unlikely scenario. It’s a perfectly real and possible scenario.

Besides, it’s doesn’t matter if the female is 10, 14, 20 or 65. Forcing a woman pregnant through rape and wishing to deny that woman a perfectly safe and simple medical procedure is evil.

It doesn’t affect men at all only in that they want to control women and girls bodies.

That therefore makes the man all of those things.

Or do you believe that nice men wish to control women’ and girls bodies and deprive them of safe abortion. No matter what the circumstances?

@GetOffMyLan you sound angry, probably because I don't agree with you. I'm not angry that you disagree with me - you have every right to your opinion. Charlie and I had that in common.

His death was horrific, the fact his family were there even more so. Killing someone is absolutely wrong.

That said, I do not believe he was a "good man". I cannot agree that someone who was openly racist and misogynistic was a "good man".

What did he do?

Stochastic terror is what he did.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stochastic_terrorism#

Stochastic terror is exemplified by the fact that half the country was prepared to assume, with no evidence, that the shooter was left wing and to enact retribution based on whoever they disliked the most based on that.

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1M6iqR81B1/

At least op hasn’t had her comments censored on this thread! And she’s been able to get her points across.

Ultimately, hopefully we can agree to disagree on the benefits of having your say vs being respectful, however I am worried to be honest about labelling someone like this as evil.

To me that should be saved for murderers and terrorists only.

….and paedophiles and rapists

She’s mature.

Not angry at all, I genuinely couldn't give less of a fuck that this guy was killed and I don't care that you liked him, I was just wondering why, since he had literally no redeeming qualities. Call it morbid curiosity mixed with a bit of boredom.