Hmmm. Are you sure? Let’s try something: Humans come in two genders, male and female, the phenotypical expression of those genders is only and exclusively based on the expression of the XX/XY chromosome pairs.

Or:

Killing a person just because of his beliefs and public or private expression of those beliefs is wrong, no matter what those beliefs are.

I guess I know where this will end but I’m open to be surprised.

If there are as many people as the right says who want to kill for beliefs, I have to assume you are dead now and won’t be responding. If you are not dead, either you and the right are wrong about how many people are willing to kill for your beliefs, or you both are lying for some purpose.

You’re wrong. Murder is always wrong. Celebrating murder is wrong. You can disagree with someone that’s all good and fine, you can take legal action if you opponent cross the legal border, fine. You can use self defense if your opponent crosses even that border. But the one thing that is unacceptable under all circumstances is to a) murder someone because of words b) celebrating this murder.

You can, of course, disagree. That makes you a horrible person, I would still not kill you or celebrate of someone else would do it.

what about murder in war? is all the murder in Gaza wrong?

Are you comparing the murder or someone with the wrong opinion to an ongoing war that happened because irreconcilable religious differences and mutual drive to total extermination?

Sounds like a simple difference of opinion about gods if you ask me.

And arguing with religious people is supposed to lead to a sane outcome?

Murder is ok if you’re religious?

Murder is OK if somone is perceived as homophobic, transphobic and engaged in so called hate speech?

Well, in this case I have some news for you about the population of Gaza, Hamas and Palestine in particular and the vast majority or muslims in general.

I haven’t made any comments justifying murder. I just think it’s weird how you think murdering people over opinions is always wrong when a Nazi dies, but when Israel comes up suddenly it’s more complicated than that because of “irreconcilable religious differences”

You’re intentionally conflating murder with a war. When both sides are irrational to a point where aggression, defence, self-defence and preservation blurs, there’s no morally good or evil anymore, it’s all shit.

Charlie Kirk didn’t have a gun pointed at his murderer, as far as I’m aware he did never kill anyone or ordered the killing of anyone. Your comparison is not only flawed, it’s intentionally made up to compare a single person who just engaged in dialogue and used words with two populations who have basically sworn to exterminate their respective opponent (to achieve “peace in our times” as it seems).

It seems like your trying to establish that some murders for wrongthink are ok, it just needs to be Nazi. Isn’t this what you really want so say?