The Dividing Line
I think every American should be able to say whatever they want about whatever topic they want. I’m a big proponent of the First Amendment.
I generally think Americans should be able to say whatever they want about whatever topic they want without fear of repercussions.
I also think that when Americans say whatever they want, they should refrain from openly and publicly cheering on the assassination of any other American for also speaking. I think when people cross that line, there should be repercussions.
We, as a sane and civil society, should not normalize publicly gloating over a political assassination. Outside of the militant libertarians, this should be something everyone agrees on. You might express those views among friends and, frankly, if a friend recorded you and made it public they’d both not be your friend and I’d advocate no sanctions against you for having voiced that view privately among friends. It’s the public championing of an assassin we need to shut down.
Americans used to have two basic things we all agreed on.
Nazis are bad.
No one should get killed for expressing their views.
What the left has done is attempt to expand the definition of the former to get around the limitations of the latter. If anyone the left disagrees with is a Nazi, well Nazis need to die.
It’s just wild to see people believe Charlie Kirk deserved to be killed for his speech, but the same people think it is a bridge too far for one to lose their job over believing that.
I am fine with doctors, nurses, teachers, professors, soldiers, and others losing their jobs for supporting, justifying, or defending the assassination of an American they do not like. I am not fine with anyone losing their jobs saying nasty things about Charlie Kirk that do not include justifications for or defenses of the assassination. And I really vehemently oppose prosecuting anyone for “hate speech” or other speech. Sadly, the United States Attorney General seems to think there is both “free speech” and “hate speech,” which she believes is not free speech and might be something the DOJ targets. That is not the law and is indefensible.
The Attorney General, on Fox News, went so far as to claim the Christian baker should be forced to bake the cake for the gay wedding — an argument the Supreme Court rejected. In Pam Bondi’s case though, it was the threat to prosecute a business that opposed printing fliers for a Charlie Kirk rally. If Bondi wins that argument, you will be baking the cakes for the trans birthdays.
Heather Cox Richardson has one of the largest substack subscriber bases on the planet. She is a leftwing historian who many, many people on the left go to in order to put the day’s event’s in perspective. Essentially, she tells them what to believe. Here she is September 13th: