“I’m really torn up about my cousin,” my friend of 20 years wrote to me over the weekend, “he has been posting to social media celebrating Charlie Kirk’s death and I just don’t know what to do with that and where that leaves our relationship. Even for thanksgiving at my aunt’s house, it’s just… I agreed with Charlie on the vast majority of issues, and if my cousin thought he deserved to die because of his beliefs, that means he thinks the same thing about me. How do I let my kids and wife around that?”
The friend who sent me this text is one of the most kind, good-hearted, and respectable people I have known. When I read his message, I couldn’t help but think, yeah, I’m there, too. I’m seeing people I went to college with celebrate the death of a man for no other reason than that he publicly shared the same beliefs which I hold. If they’re happy about him dying for that reason, then they would celebrate me being killed in front of my wife for the same reason - how on earth do we answer that?
The Charlie Kirk situation has been weighing heavily on my heart and mind since the moment I got that first update – Charlie Kirk has been shot. In the days since his murder, Charlie’s death has settled like a bright and illuminating light over our land, revealing the true character of people as the news spreads. It has revealed the people we can live with and has exposed the people we cannot live with. Charlie Kirk’s brutal assassination has shown us that beyond Christian vs secular, left vs right, there is a divide that exists in our country. The divide is simple: people who I would want as my neighbors and people who want me dead.
Charlie and I agreed on no less than 90% of the ideas and policies he spoke on and he was killed for those beliefs. The only difference between Charlie and me is that Charlie was much more famous and successful – but the murder of fame and success isn’t what the far left has been openly celebrating for days. The extremist left has been celebrating Charlie’s death because they hated his ideas, his character, and his God – things which he shares with me and millions of other Americans.
Make no mistake, the leftists who couldn’t contain their jubilant reaction after hearing the news of Charlie’s murder would not extend any more grace to you or your family. To them, it wasn’t about Charlie – it was about Charlie’s beliefs in Christianity and his Bible-based cultural and political worldview which flows out of Christianity. In that very real sense, I am Charlie Kirk. Your MAGA uncle is Charlie Kirk. Your friend who is an inch to the right of you politically and socially is Charlie Kirk. And if their beliefs were known to leftwing extremists, their deaths would be celebrated every bit as much as Charlie’s has been.
A troubling but unsurprising trend has emerged from the left, wherein voices ranging from Bill Maher to Destiny claim either that we do not know who supported, caused, conducted, and cheered the murder of Charlie Kirk; or that it was actually the extremist right – not the left – who killed Charlie. Numerous social media sources of leftwing misinformation have circulated baseless claims which attempt to frame conservatives and exonerate leftist ideologies of the most recent blood they spilled. The Marx-based belief system which is so steeped in hate and lust for absolute power that it even seeks to use and corrupt children is actively being marketed as a banner of peace and victimhood.
The reality of the situation is this; per verified personal informants, the FBI, and Utah’s Governor Cox, Charlie Kirk was shot by a radicalized individual who held leftist ideology. This individual is a homosexual young man who was dating a transgender male (a biological male who was attempting to live as a female). The shooter shared ANTIFA ideology via the very ammo he used to conduct the assassination and believed that Charlie was hateful.
The movement that Charlie Kirk built will keep growing long after he's gone.
His legacy will be felt by millions of people for years to come, and it grows stronger every day as we remember the incredible life he led. pic.twitter.com/uPXcRBEWnt
— JD Vance (@JDVance) September 18, 2025
But one crazed left-winger is far from the worst of this situation. The most damning and disheartening element of this national tragedy is the despicable manner in which thousands – if not millions – chose to react. Before the blood had dried, leftists took to social media to celebrate Charlie Kirk’s suffering. Counting likes and retweets, I have personally seen hundreds of thousands of people sharing in gleeful celebration of Charlie Kirk’s murder.
I do not think it is a hyperbolic statement in the slightest to say that millions of people have, in some way, publicly cheered the vicious ending of an innocent and peaceful life. We know who the shooter is and we know why he did what he did – but even if we had no idea who pulled the trigger, we would have thousands of examples of people who celebrated the fact that he pulled the trigger – and those people were very open about why they were celebrating.
During my time in public activism I have personally received a handful of death threats and violent messages aimed at me - the occasional leftwing nutjob doesn’t surprise me even a little bit. But Charlie’s death was different. It was cold-blooded. It was public. It was graphic and emotional. Most of all, though, the evil celebration of his demise was massive, and it hit close to home.
People I have known for years were celebrating and justifying the violent act – it was shocking and saddening and enlightening all at once. The line in the sand could not be drawn any more boldly. As Ted Cruz said, they don’t kill you because you’re a Nazi, they call you a Nazi so that they can kill you.
Another troubling element of this situation is the response – or lack of response – from Christian leaders. I want to dive into and confront some of the problematic trends I have seen.
First, why does it seem that almost every Christian leader who comments on the Charlie Kirk assassination seems to start their statement with a line akin to, ‘Now, I don’t agree with everything Charlie believed, but…” This seems like a weak and empty attempt at pandering to the progressive crowd and we ought not accept it from our leaders.
Here is my opinion; if you’re a Christian shepherd and you feel the need to issue the, “I don’t agree with everything the murdered man ever said” disclaimer, then you need to clarify exactly what you mean. What disagreement was so strong and so pertinent that when announcing a man’s murder, you felt the need to distance yourself from him? Was it Charlie’s biblical view on marriage and abortion? His biblical opinions on human identity? What exactly is it that drove you to issue that disclaimer?
TO PASTORS WHO ARE DISPARAGING CHARLIE KIRK
"If your pastor is continually ignoring these things because they are afraid of upsetting people in the church... That is not what it means to be a pastor."@LucasMiles @SteveGruberShow pic.twitter.com/pghikBCJYk
— Real America's Voice (RAV) (@RealAmVoice) September 18, 2025
Next, let’s briefly discuss the recurring Christian talking point that goes something like this, “During times like these, we must not give into division. Being divisive is exactly what the shooter would want.” Similar to my first critique, I have seen this line making the rounds and it makes me question, “What does that even mean?”
I am going to point out the fact that Charlie Kirk was a religious and political martyr. I am going to point out the fact that Charlie Kirk was a brother in Christ and his family deserves justice. I am going to point out the fact that a dangerous and destructive ideology has been revealed to be widespread in my nation and it cannot go unchecked. If that is too divisive for you as a Christian, then I am going to challenge you to show from the Bible where Christians are called to avoid all division everywhere no matter what. I would also like to know exactly what we are being warned to not divide from. Christ tells us in Luke chapter 12 that a Christian life well lived will inherently cause division. We are called to avoid sin. We are called to avoid foolishness. I do not believe that Christians are called to avoid division, nor are we commanded to sacrifice justice and truth on the altar of some vague appeal to unity.
What disagreement was so strong and so pertinent that when announcing a man’s murder, you felt the need to distance yourself from him? Was it Charlie’s biblical view on marriage and abortion? His biblical opinions on human identity? What exactly is it that drove you to issue that disclaimer?
Lastly, I strongly feel that we must understand that Charlie was political – but he was not merely political for politics’ sake. Charlie was a Christian Conservative – that is to say, he was a Christian first and a political Conservative second – his politics were an outpouring of his religion and morality, as they should be for all Believers. One of my great annoyances with the modern church is that we take topics which are religious and moral in nature – like the right to life, the family structure, or human identity – and we label them as “political issues”. In doing so, we ban discussions about these issues from Churches and Bible studies because, well, we wouldn’t want to make our Bible time political. But the vast majority of American hot-button issues aren’t political! These are moral and religious issues which just happen to be politically relevant in America – Charlie understood that.
In a world where leftwing extremists openly call for violence, celebrate the pain of their opposition, mock grieving families, and attempt to “both-sides” a lopsided situation, how do we move forward? I believe that VP Vance nailed the answer to this question when he noted that unity can not exist while a group celebrates assassinations and spreads deadly lies.
This does not mean we take destruction and violence to the streets, it does not mean we harbor hate, and it does not mean that we stop spreading the gospel of hope to all – even the most vile individuals. It does, however, mean that we walk in wisdom with our eyes open. We seek justice from our governmental structure and work to create a better, safer, and more righteous culture. We take lawful action to protect our families and better our nation – and we do it all knowing the risk.
The holistic approach I am describing is one that Charlie Kirk was familiar with, but he is not the one who invented it. The Bible tells us to share truth in love – not to sacrifice truth for a modernistic understanding of love. Not to share truth and forget that we must love even our enemies. But to share truth in love. If you think that sounds impossible, get in line. It is immensely difficult. Charlie was really good at it and he didn’t hold a candle to the best example we have of this approach – Jesus Christ.
The Bible shows us that Jesus majorly disagrees with the modern world’s view of what it means to love. Love does not mean abandoning justice. Love does not mean blind loyalty to a vague definition of unity. Love means hard conversations. Sometimes love means righteous anger. Love means a fierce loyalty to the morality taught by the Bible and all that follows downstream from that reality. So understand that to a strikingly large population, you are Charlie Kirk. There’s no use lying or sugar coating the truth. But after swallowing that pill, press forward in truth and love – that is how we win.
