Update (9/15/2025 1:55 pm PST): This will be the final update to this post. According to recent reports, including a statement by Utah governor, Spencer Cox, it does look like the shooter, Tyler Robinson, had become radicalized online. In addition, Robinson was living with a boyfriend who identified as Transgender. This evidence supports my overall concern below about Leftist ideology, as well as disturbingly confirming what seems to be a trend of transgender-motivated violence.
Update (9/12/2025 1:09 pm PST): Since writing this post it seems that Charlie Kirk’s murderer has been caught. While Tyler Robinson is technically still only a suspect, he will be formally charged on Tuesday, it looks like he is the shooter. Apparently his own father, a former police officer, turned him in. According to reports, Tyler’s family are conservative republicans, and it seems any radicalization he underwent occurred while at college and online. There is no indication that Tyler was LGBTQ+ or affiliated with any particular Leftist organization. However, one of the bullet casings was engraved with a clear political message: “Catch! Fascist!” At this time I feel no need to amend what I have written below, but I believe that the current evidence supports Robert Gagnon’s point about the toxic political environment on our university campuses. As I have argued elsewhere, it is the universities that represent the frontline of our moral and ideological battles. That’s why Charlie Kirk was there to begin with. He knew where the battlefield was for the hearts and minds of our children, and the soul of the nation.
My Near Encounter With Charlie
In the Spring of 2024 I found myself doing campus evangelism at Cal-State Fullerton with a team from church. That same day, as I discovered, Turning Point USA was also visiting CSUF. While we had many fruitful interactions that morning, several prayers, some robust apologetical engagements and, as far as I could tell, one possible conversion, most of the students we encountered were in a great rush to get past our booth. It wasn’t just because they didn’t want to talk about religion, although there was obviously some of that. It was because they wanted to see one man that day, and that one man was Charlie Kirk.
Kirk was the dynamic voice of young conservatism in the land, and his reputation was growing exponentially, especially in the run-up to the 2024 election. Therefore, although I didn’t follow him much at the time, from what I had heard of him, I assumed that most of what he believed and defended I agreed with. Later I found that also to be true.
In one encounter that morning, with a student who had clearly had some philosophical training, I mentioned at the end of our long, and cordial, exchange that while what Kirk had to say was certainly important, what we were discussing far outweighed any political conversation the student might have with Kirk. The student nodded in agreement, but still rushed out of my presence to get down to the TPUSA tent on time. Knowing what I know now, I guess I can’t blame him.
What I didn’t know at that time, not having seen much of Kirk’s content, nor having ever seeing him live, was that Kirk not only was a penetrating speaker, an acute defender of conservatives principles and political values, but that he was also an outspoken Christian. In fact, later, when I started watching some of his material, I noticed he would often share the Gospel with those in the audience at his many on-campus events and debates. And while some of my apologetics’ friends might say he butchered the occasional argument for God’s existence, still, as far as I could tell, Kirk was not only courageous in arguing for the good of the nation politically, he was equally bold in his defense of the Gospel. As such, in sharing the Gospel with others, he was impressing upon them that which was of ultimate good, not only for the nation, but for their immortal souls.
And now Charlie Kirk is dead. Killed by what seems to be an assassin’s bullet yesterday at yet another open-air event. This time at a small college in Utah. Anyone who has watched the video, and who has a conscience, cannot help but be shocked. And anyone who has seen the pictures of his family, cannot help but grieve.
Over the years I have refrained from responding quickly to tragic events, especially criminal ones like this. The temptation to get something “out there” so the algorithms will pick it up, can make a commodity out of one’s writing and potentially turn a human tragedy into an opportunity for personal gain. That is itself immoral, and just plain cheap. So while I have written in the past about the deaths of Popes or commented on the passing of theologians, it was always in respect to their legacy, their body of work, and their impact, and far less to do with their actual deaths.
But this time I feel I should write something. After watching several hours of newsfeed yesterday about Charlie Kirk’s life and his ministry, I think his brutal murder demands some response, even if a somewhat cursory one. There should be an outcry about his death. There must be. And so there are a few things that need to be said; some critical, the others, I believe, hopeful.
What Cannot Be Tolerated: The Left Must Be Held Accountable
First off, we cannot be naive. Even we Christians who, like our Lord, are to be lead like sheep to the slaughter, are nevertheless instructed by Christ Himself to be both gentle as doves and wise as serpents (Matt 10:16). So we must be wise to the ways of the world, and we must speak truthfully about good and evil, justice and injustice, right and wrong. We must do so if we are ever going to experience peace. As such, we need to keep in mind that those who say we shouldn’t “politicize” something like the assassination of Charlie Kirk likely have their own political interests in mind. While we don’t need to see this murder in purely political terms–for clearly it is spiritual– to suggest it is not something that needs to be addressed politically is sheer deception, it is itself a political tactic.
Thus, while not all the facts are in (which means I may amend this later), it does seem hard to think that Kirk’s murder was not politically motivated and, as such, demands a commensurate response. And although there is some possible world where the shooter turns out to be conservative, the likelihood, given the recent pattern of political violence, suggests a Leftist source for the crime. It also makes sense in principle, since for those who make politics God– which, it must be said, is almost axiomatic on the Left– this kind of act becomes an act of religious proportions. Moreover, as Robert A.J. Gagnon correctly pointed out yesterday, the Left has, through political coercion, intimidation and physical violence, essentially captured the universities of America:
https://x.com/RobertAJGagnon1/status/1965897674265395582
The political-religious ideology of the Left in America must be fundamentally dismantled: full stop. Its long legacy of character assassination, and growing penchant for bodily assassination, are but superficial features of its central atrocity: the assassination of Truth itself. I have written about Leftist ideology in several other places on this blog (here, here and here), so I won’t rehash these here. But what Kirk was fighting against is ultimately what killed him (or, at least, killed his body). It is a real enemy and, although this enemy seems to have won the day momentarily, Kirk’s death only serves to demonstrate its intent and its ambitions.
This is not to say that there cannot be similar radicalism on the Right. Of course there can be, of course there is, and of course there has been. But the consistent problem of violence over the last several decades, with perhaps one very rare exception, yes that one, has been from the Left of the political and ideological spectrum. If not directly political, in the form of presidential assassination attempts or threats, then inspired by leftist politics, as seen in the form of urban riots or the murder of Health Care CEOs. The reason for this is deeply moral and even metaphysical.
The moral hubris of the Left underwrites its use of violence. The air of absolute moral superiority, of total certitude about its moral mission, which is coterminous with its political mission, lends to the use of violence. Leftists do not see themselves as sinners, they see their political opponents as sinners and themselves as martyrs and saints (but martyrs and saints without a moral law other than the one they created). As Charles Taylor once put it about the Left, in contrast to the Nietzschean Right, it is the mentality of the “victim” that drives such arrogance:
Then there is the victim scenario. This can colonize the Left. All evil is projected onto the others; they alone are the victimizers; we are pure victims. The liberal self feels relatively innocent, because (a) it sees the whole picture clearly, and (b) it is part of the solution….The victim scenario…a kind of deviant, secularized Christianity, achieves total innocence, at the cost of projecting total evil on the other. This can justify Bolshevik-type ruthlessness, as well as titanic action. We can see how this carries out in both processes, which distance us from evil: we are part of the solution, and we are utterly other than those who inflict harm. We have no part with them.
Taylor, A Secular Age, 683-684
Any group that sees itself as inherently morally superior to the other, and sees itself as the solution, is dangerous to society. This is especially when the group that feels morally superior is a godless entity which believes it creates or constructs its own moral law. The “cult of the victim,” as Paul Hollander once called it, is so integrated into the political and social Left in America, that unless that cultist mindset is broken, and the souls who adhere to it freed, we should expect more of the same kind of violent rhetoric and lethal activity. It cannot be tolerated that people be allowed to see themselves as pure victims–as sinless creatures–be reinforced in that thought by political operatives, and then enabled to run amok in society: sent out to execute a political agenda without any sense of moral guilt or shame, simply because they feel they are oppressed.
What Must Be Praised: Clarity and Courage in Crisis
I am hesitant to use the term “Martyr” too quickly, but at the same time, there is something about Kirk’s murder that keeps bringing my mind to the concept, a concept which I have written about here. As a student of theology and Church history I don’t want to apply such weighty terms too hastily and without sufficient research. However, given what I noted above, that Kirk was more than just a political voice, but also a defender of the Gospel, it may be worth at least exploring. As things unfold, and the real quality of this man, his mission, and his untimely death are further detailed, it may not be unwarranted to think in terms of martyrdom for Charles James Kirk.
At a minimum, we should give praise where praise is due. Kirk was outspoken in his witness to Jesus Christ. He defended unpopular moral truths, like the rights of the unborn, the sanctity of marriage, the holiness of human sexuality, and a biblical understanding of citizenship and nationhood. He was a voice of reason, and he spoke to his political and ideological enemies with concern for them.
Finally, I would want to end on a hopeful note. Although seeing pictures of Kirk with his wife and two small children make it near impossible to countenance any feelings of hopefulness, it is still the case that Kirk, in spite of the early end of his life, clearly ended his life well. It is not really the hope of any true Christian to live a long life. Rather, our hope is to live a life worthy of our calling in Christ, one that honors the salvation that He won for us. From what I know, from everything that I can gather, it seems that Kirk has done just that. Where others seemed to cower and compromise, even other Christians, in the face of social crisis, Kirk stood courageously with clarity of voice and vision.
I will assume that the last thing that Kirk heard after the ring of the bullet was something like “well done, good and faithful servant.” Until I see any evidence to the contrary, that is both my belief and my hope.
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In