Yik Yak logo
Download TikTok Instagram X
Yik Yak icon
Join communities on Yik Yak Download
US Politics icon
US Politics 5d
MLK and Kirk can’t both speak truth. They literally contradict one another. Kirk literally hated MLK, his movement, and the Civil Rights Act. MLK pushed for the advancement of civil rights and equality. Kirk said that was a bad thing. He is no hero.
US Politics icon
US Politics 5d
What do MLK, Charlie Kirk, and Jesus Christ all have in common? They were murdered for preaching peace and truth.
comment

9
upvote 165 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous 5d

Also can we just say that being assassinated because people think you’re inherently inferior for being a certain race and dying after being a contentious podcaster are two completely different things

upvote 38 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous 5d

So we’re not going to talk about putting Charlie Kirk at the same rank as Jesus? I don’t think anyone’s up there including MLK (he’s top tier though) but Charlie Kirk. Yall are going to get judged hard for that one.

upvote 13 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous 5d

Charlie disagreed with the open ended nature of the language of the civil rights act, not the premise. It’s important to know one’s opinions before criticizing them

upvote -2 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous 5d

Yea Kirk doesn’t cheat on his wife or grape woman Kirk is an objectively better person than mlk.

upvote -5 downvote
🫕
Anonymous replying to -> #2 5d

The only place this information comes from is the 1960s FBI, and that’s not exactly a reliable source when you remember how virulently racist J. Edgar Hoover was, and how many civil rights leaders he literally had assassinated.

upvote 11 downvote
🫕
Anonymous replying to -> #2 5d

“The federal government would never lie!” ass comment

upvote 10 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #5 5d

Ok genuine question here: what exactly is the “open ended” nature of the Civil Rights act 😭

upvote 5 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #1 5d

Sure np it’s a good question. He argued the language allows the government too much intervention into how private businesses operate (Charlie was against most gov intervention in general, a conservative/libertarian philosophy). In reference to endedness, it allows the government to create and continuously expand “protected classes” which led to modern day DEI practices he argued were racially divisive like affirmative action.

upvote 0 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #1 5d

Also Title II and Title VII were worded as such to prevent discrimination in the workplace but left room for diversity quotas and identity-based preferences to still be enacted in the name of equality while, in his opinion, being further discriminatory by creating racial preferences

upvote 0 downvote