He's not advocating stoning the gays in that clip. If anything he seems to be pointing out that quoting Leviticus as the final interpretation of God's law is a mistake. it is hard to tell what he's actually saying because the clip cuts off half way through whatever point he is making.
If you're going to start complaining about "beliefs that ... spread lies" like you were a bit earlier, you might want to not make things up trying to smear a bloke who just got assassinated. It isn't even scoring political points because you just look like a hypocrite if people ask for sources.
I'm not going to check your random list, if you're making things up about your primary claim I'm just going to assume it is the usual internet dross.
Not sure quoting the guy’s literal words is “smearing”. You’re insisting his literal words mean something other than the plain reading. Again, that’s fine, and your prerogative. As is choosing to avoid virtually anything this guy ever spoke or wrote, while continuing to insist he just, like, had slightly different opinions, man.
He was a hateful, ignorant man. And it’s silly to pretend otherwise.
> Not sure quoting the guy’s literal words is “smearing”
A literal quote involves, at some point, quoting what he said literally. Something you haven't and can't do to support your claim. Lying harder isn't going to get you out of that one - you tried your best and are unable to find a literal quote. You now know you can't. It appears he did not, in fact, "literally advocated for, e.g., stoning gay people".
I don't know why you think doubling down on baseless smears is helping you, but a tip on politics - when you look foolish because your claims are that easy to disprove, just to stop and slink away. And maybe as a more general rule don't try to smear the dead with things they didn't say, they aren't around to defend themselves. You'd be able to get away with it before videos existed but these days it just looks like you're being slimy.
Calling the rule in the bible that calls for the stoning of gay people, and I quote, from the video: “God’s perfect law when it comes to sexual matters.” is absolutely advocating for the stoning of gay people. You are the one extending grace to defend a monster just because he is dead. https://fair.org/home/action-alert-snopes-thinks-kirk-was-ki...
I also think you seem to be unfamiliar with his work, and are giving him the benefit of the doubt in this isolated example you’ve familiarized yourself with. Please. Familiarize yourself with more. You’ll uncover a pattern of unserious and hateful nonsense.
Since this has devolved into accusations that I’m lying, being slimy, and calling my very-obviously-not baseless claims “baseless smears”, I think it’s time I pull the plug on this little exchange. Take care.
> I’m lying, being slimy, and [...] I think it’s time I pull the plug on this little exchange. Take care.
Well I'm glad we're ending this on common ground, but I note that you can make anyone say nearly anything when you start taking literal quotes at the start and end of their speech and ignore what they're actually saying. Phrases are only meaningful quotes when taken in context.
You claimed Kirk advocated stoning gays. You were (are) lying, he didn't. You're best follow up is quoting him "literally" saying something different, out of context and doubling down despite the fact you've been called out. Which is a pretty sure tell that you know you aren't actually representing what he meant. Particularly since the clip is long enough to make it clear that he wasn't advocating stoning anyone. He was making a logical point.
The dude just got assassinated. Don't baselessly smear the man while the dust is settling.
If you're going to start complaining about "beliefs that ... spread lies" like you were a bit earlier, you might want to not make things up trying to smear a bloke who just got assassinated. It isn't even scoring political points because you just look like a hypocrite if people ask for sources.
I'm not going to check your random list, if you're making things up about your primary claim I'm just going to assume it is the usual internet dross.