Anyone being assassinated for political views, no matter how bad said views were, elicits sympathy automatically due to the long-term effects of political assassinations when there isn’t an uprising going on. I don’t see what’s wrong with that, and confirmation bias finding additional “things” to have flimsier sympathies for is a thing. Also, “he was a Christian/man of faith” is something I only hear Christians say.
With how you put it, it sounds like the problem wasn’t Kirk being assassinated. It’s that there weren’t more politically motivated deaths in a similar time frame, otherwise known as an “uprising” that would have normalized it.
Yeah, I’d support a movement led by someone I agree with that would set back the oppression by more than a few months. (“agree with” would include minimizing innocent casualties and stuff.) Though Kirk would be one of the weirdest targets, so they better have a good explanation for the efficacy.
Anyone being assassinated for political views, no matter how bad said views were, elicits sympathy automatically due to the long-term effects of political assassinations when there isn’t an uprising going on. I don’t see what’s wrong with that, and confirmation bias finding additional “things” to have flimsier sympathies for is a thing. Also, “he was a Christian/man of faith” is something I only hear Christians say.
With how you put it, it sounds like the problem wasn’t Kirk being assassinated. It’s that there weren’t more politically motivated deaths in a similar time frame, otherwise known as an “uprising” that would have normalized it.
I think you’re on to something.
Yeah, I’d support a movement led by someone I agree with that would set back the oppression by more than a few months. (“agree with” would include minimizing innocent casualties and stuff.) Though Kirk would be one of the weirdest targets, so they better have a good explanation for the efficacy.