Being An American Hero
To The Editor:
Charlie Kirk’s death is awful. It should not have happened. I wish it had not happened. I wish we did not live in a time and in a nation where public figures are increasingly targeted and killed for their beliefs.
Charlie Kirk was a talented, influential public figure. He inspired young people to engage in their world and in politics. His shooting and tragic death have made him a hero to people who shared his beliefs. But does that make him an American hero?
Someone revered as an American hero should be someone who embodies through their life and deeds core American values, the principles that lie at the heart of our founding documents. Those documents, the Constitution and its Declaration of Independence, embrace inclusiveness. The Declaration of Independence proclaims that “all men are created equal,” that all are entitled to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” Our founding documents also established separation of church and state as a critical aspect of the emerging United States of America: The state must stand apart from religion.
Charlie Kirk’s beliefs are not aligned with these traditional American values. His public speeches were full of bigotry, intolerance and exclusion. He frequently demeaned and discredited Black Americans and immigrants. He also became a staunch believer in Christian nationalism and a vocal proponent for that perspective.
Charlie Kirk has been compared to Abraham Lincoln and Martin Luther King. Lincoln and King are American heroes. They dedicated their public lives to the end of slavery and to equal rights. They represent American ideals of inclusion and tolerance. They died because of their commitment to these principals. Charlie Kirk does not stand for those values.
And Christian nationalism is utterly anti-American. Many early settlers fled from governments that enforced religion. For the most part, both refugees and their countries of origin believed fervently in the Christian Bible. They disagreed about the intent of the Bible. Governments persecuted and killed their citizens because of different interpretations of God’s word. The men who created our system of government wanted to avoid this known evil by clearly separating the function of governance from the role of religion: equality under the law and freedom to worship as each person chooses.
Today, many United States citizens identify as non-religious or as other than Christian. Our government was designed to protect everyone’s right to worship if and when and how they choose. That is a true American value. Charlie Kirk advocated against it.
We are a diverse nation. Diversity requires tolerance. We have become a divided nation because of intolerance. Some Americans stand with Charlie Kirk. But many do not. We would do well to stop disregarding, diminishing, discarding, despising, demonizing each other. We need to find common ground if we want our Union to endure.
Anne Renner
Sandy Hook
Anne, your first paragraph condemning Charlie Kirk’s murder is commendable and appreciated. Sadly, it needs to be said. Newly on campus, a college student I know found himself surrounded by people who thought Charlie had it coming to him, and this student can’t help but wonder if they’d want him dead, too, for holding similar views to Charlie’s. No, this student isn’t a bigot, intolerant or exclusionary—but quite the opposite, as was Charlie Kirk quite the opposite. It seems that, to paraphrase Ronald Reagan, so much of what you know about Charlie Kirk just isn’t so. It makes me wonder whether you have actually listened to a Charlie Kirk Show or to one of his civil debates.
I hear the term “Christian nationalist” bandied about these days. I’m a Christian and I’m a nationalist—that is, I’m devoted to what’s in the best interests of our nation–as was Charlie. Does that make us “Christian nationalists,” which you say is “utterly anti-American”?? Charlie had deeply held Christian beliefs that seemed to shape all his actions and speech. As the devout Christian that he was, Charlie would likely have wanted others to see the joy and salvation of holding similar beliefs. (He’d still be alive today if his assassin had followed Christ and the 10 commandments, including, “You shall not murder.”) But, did Charlie ever say that only Christians are welcome in our country? Certainly not that I’m aware of.
You talk about the “separation of church and state” in our founding documents. You must be referring to the U.S. Constitution’s first amendment, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” Did Charlie call on Congress to make a law to establish a state religion or to prohibit people from practicing the faith of their choice? Certainly not that I’m aware of.
There seems to be a lot of misinformation about Charlie out there. For example, the NY Times recently had to issue this retraction, “A correction was made on Sept. 11, 2025: An earlier version of this article described incorrectly an antisemitic statement that Charlie Kirk had made on an episode of his podcast. He was quoting a statement from a post on social media and went on to critique it. It was not his own statement.”
I urge you to not just listen to the propaganda, but actually watch some of Charlie’s videos (unabridged) and see for yourself. You might still disagree with his views, but perhaps you will no longer feel the need to call him a bigot, intolerant, exclusionary and anti-American. Perhaps you’ll see for yourself how Charlie was all about inviting his opponents to a civil debate, not about “disregarding, diminishing, discarding, despising, demonizing” others. Perhaps you’ll see Charlie’s example as a way in which we can all treat one another rather than engaging in name calling, intimidation, or violence.