• YappyMonotheist@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      4 hours ago

      I disagree with the first part, lol. What were the odds he would’ve done a 180 and started preaching love, wisdom, cooperation and virtue? That he would at any point become something besides a blight on the world? Or that he would simply shut his mouth? This is a net positive, not unlike the killing of a mass rapist being a net positive, and the only ones who could suffer momentarily are his children (but maybe in time they’ll understand the same way the kids of this fictional rapist would/should also understand).

      • DominusOfMegadeus@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 hours ago

        I say it’s actually better than the rapist, because Charlie Kirk’s influence was far wider, and his words could and did lead to a far larger and more widespread volume of suffering.