In her Sept. 23 letter to the editor, Autumn Sandeen, to whom I am related, appears to have missed the context of Charlie Kirk’s response to Ms. Rachel regarding Pride Month. Mr. Kirk was responding to Ms. Rachel’s cherrypicking phrases from the Bible to support her case by cherrypicking a different verse in the same area of the Bible that contradicted what she said. His point was that anyone can cherrypick scripture out of context to make their point.
As for Charlie Kirk’s view on gays, he once admonished a student who said there was no room in the conservative movement for gay men, by listing multiple gay conservatives. Charlie asked the student, “What does what they do in their private life concern you so much?”
Sounds like a rather inclusive, non-stoning attitude to me.
Charlie Kirk was critical of what he called “the LGBTQ agenda” in politics, telling a gay college student, “I don’t think you should introduce yourself just based on your sexuality because that’s not who you are.”
Author Stephen King, who is, by no stretch of the imagination, a conservative, at first said that Charlie Kirk advocated stoning gays — and then completely retracted his statement, saying that he was completely wrong. To say that Charlie Kirk “almost” advocated stoning gays, as Autumn Sandeen seems to be saying, is equally inaccurate.
Michael Sandeen
Canyon Country
