Chastity White Rose

Tag: faith

  • Chapter 17: Blessed are the Peacemakers

    Right now, in September 2025, the world has gone mad on social media, with everyone having an opinion on the murder of Charlie Kirk. I have no such opinion about him but I think it is a fine time to remind you why I have been committed to non-violence for many years. Therefore, my only statement that I will ever make is that it doesn’t matter who Charlie was or whether you like the things he said; the fact is, nobody should be shot just for what they are speaking.

    I didn’t know Charlie and I didn’t know who he was prior to his being shot on September 10, 2025. However, I thought it was quite strange that this one act of murder got so much media attention, even though people are getting shot, bombed, stabbed, or starved to death, including many of those who are innocent and have done nothing wrong.

    Although I didn’t know Charlie Kirk personally, I think he had the right idea because he did not commit violence against people, but instead he had debates with them and talked about disagreements rather than resorting to violence. He talked to people, and he said some things that people disagreed with sometimes. After the news broke that he was shot, many people on Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok were celebrating that he was shot and said he deserved it.

    The real tragedy is not the death of Charlie Kirk but the death of freedom of speech. If you kill someone just because you don’t like what they said, then the same reasoning could be used to kill you when someone doesn’t like what you said.

    Moreover, I think violence is for the weak. I think it takes a stronger person to have difficult conversations about areas of disagreement and try to resolve them through peaceful means. I personally think that guns, bombs, and all manner of military equipment should be destroyed because nobody should be killing anyone.

    Let me be clear, I understand that others are violent and that they do not follow my philosophy of radical pacifism and peaceful protest. I also don’t think someone can reach this stage without an evolution in ethics and a strong moral framework based on a solid philosophy or religion.

    To be a peacemaker is to take the hard route, instead of the easy path of violence. Living peacefully and resolving conflicts takes time, conversations, studying history, reading books, and considering each new issue as it arises.

    Charlie was not perfect. He was just as flawed as any human is, but he did identify as a Christian, and I think he would have understood that violence is not good. Those who call themselves Christians would do well to remember what Jesus said about the importance of being peaceful and non-violent.

    Matthew 26:47 While he was still speaking, Judas, one of the twelve, arrived. With him was a large crowd armed with swords and clubs, sent by the chief priests and elders of the people. 48 (Now the betrayer had given them a sign, saying, “The one I kiss is the man. Arrest him!”) 49 Immediately he went up to Jesus and said, “Greetings, Rabbi,” and kissed him. 50 Jesus said to him, “Friend, do what you are here to do.” Then they came and took hold of Jesus and arrested him. 51 But one of those with Jesus grabbed his sword, drew it out, and struck the high priest’s slave, cutting off his ear. 52 Then Jesus said to him, “Put your sword back in its place! For all who take hold of the sword will die by the sword. 53 Or do you think that I cannot call on my Father and that he would send me more than 12 legions of angels right now? 54 How then would the scriptures that say it must happen this way be fulfilled?” 55 At that moment Jesus said to the crowd, “Have you come out with swords and clubs to arrest me like you would an outlaw? Day after day I sat teaching in the temple courts, yet you did not arrest me. 56 But this has happened so that the scriptures of the prophets would be fulfilled.” Then all the disciples left him and fled.

    Charlie was not a Vegan, unfortunately, and he did not take a Vegan seriously when they brought up the issue. Although Charlie called himself Pro-Life when it came to humans, he was dismissive of the idea that we should not cause unnecessary suffering and death to animals. He also interrupted a lot and changed the subject.

    Charlie Kirk Deleted This Debate With a Vegan

    I Debated Charlie Kirk – He Deleted The Video

    I bring this up not to say that Charlie deserved to be shot. Rather, I mention it to show why even his attitudes and those who celebrated his death are operating under a culture of violence. People believe that they have the right to kill any animal, including humans, as soon as they disagree with them or are of a difference race, species, religion, or political affiliation.

    Charlie got the Vegan topic wrong, and sadly, due to his death, we will never see him become consistently pro-life.

    There is one thing I do agree with Charlie on, though; he was right to be against abortion. In fact, one of the things many people criticized him for was saying that the 45 million babies killed in abortion was worse than the Holocaust, where 6 million Jews were killed.

    Charlie Kirk Compares Abortion to the Holocaust

    Charlie’s logic is correct on this issue. Deciding that a group of people is unwanted or undesirable and then killing them all is an unjustifiable genocide.

    And if Charlie were still alive, I would suggest to him that he use this same logic to reconsider what humans do to animals.

    https://christspiracy.com/

    The Ugly Truth: Most Important Films to Watch

    At this time, people are also trying to blame the transgender people for the death of Charlie Kirk. I must admit that part of the problem is that so many young people, including many transgender people, are celebrating the death of Charlie Kirk. This does not make us look any better in a time when we are the most hated group of people in the United States of America.

    Shortly after the death of Charlie Kirk, I couldn’t help but notice that the attitudes of some of my coworkers had changed towards me. Everyone was talking about the death of Charlie Kirk because it was all over the news media. They looked at me as if I had killed him, just because I am transgender.

    I didn’t want to make a statement about this issue, but I also felt a responsibility to say something because I will not risk my silence being interpreted as meaning that I am in favor of the murder of Charlie Kirk.

    When Transgender people are happy about the death of some famous dude like Charlie, how is it any better than when people murder transgender people?

    When Charlie jokes and cuts off a Vegan who questions him on veganism, how is he any better than those who laughed at him after he was shot?

    In times like this when a single word can inspire people to shoot or bomb people, I am reminded of a quote from Schindler’s List when Oskar Schindler explained what true power is to Amon Goeth.

    Schindler: They fear us because we have the power to kill arbitrarily. A man commits a crime, he should know better. We have him killed and we feel pretty good about it. Or we kill him ourselves and we feel even better. That’s not power, though, that’s justice. That’s different than power. Power is when we have every justification to kill – and we don’t. Goeth: You think that’s power.

    Schindler: That’s what the emperors had. A man stole something, he’s brought in before the emperor, he throws himself down on the ground, he begs for mercy, he knows he’s going to die. And the emperor pardons him. This worthless man, he lets him go.

    Goeth: I think you are drunk.

    Schindler: That’s power, Amon. That is power.

    Similarly, I think true power is to be able to do better than violence. Instead, we can educate, we can peacefully protest, and we can write and record ideas that live long after we die. Which reminds me, I have one more quote to share for this chapter.

    V: “Beneath this mask there is more than flesh. Beneath this mask there is an idea, Mr. Creedy, and ideas are bulletproof.”

    Killing people does not stop their ideas, their philosophy, their religion, or anything that they stood for. The death of someone solves nothing, helps no one, and is nothing to celebrate. Instead of killing people, become a peacemaker, because that is true power.

    Matthew 5:9 Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called the children of God.

  • Chapter 15: Love the Sinner Hate the Sin

    So many times in my life, I have heard the phrase “Love the sinner, hate the sin”. On the surface, it sounds good because you are saying that you love someone but disagree with what they do, but this calls into question both the intent behind the person speaking it and who they are saying it to.

    Interestingly, the only time I can remember hearing “Love the sinner, hate the sin” is when Christians are judging people for being gay or transgender. It doesn’t really work very well in this context because the person doesn’t know what the “sin” is that they are talking about. Imagine if you said, “Love the black person but hate the sin”. This statement implies that you think someone born with black skin has somehow sinned or erred in some way, as if they could have done something different and been born with a different skin color.

    I know what you’ll say next: “But being gay is a choice!”

    First, it isn’t a choice in any meaningful sense. Second, if it were a choice, it would actually be a fine choice. Third, you know what is a choice? Shutting up when you don’t know what you’re talking about.

    I will use 2 examples to illustrate the point I am making.

    Judging the Gay Person

    A person finds out that someone they know is gay. Then they start talking about hating their sin or their sinful lifestyle. But the truth is, a straight person does not know what sin they are speaking about. Are they speaking about the sin of being attracted to the same sex, which is not an action? Are they talking about a specific sexual action the person is doing? Are they in their house watching them as they do this action by themself or with their partner and judging them for doing it wrong? What specifically are they even talking about?

    Judging the Transgender Person

    Suppose someone discovers that someone is transgender, or simply assumes it because they don’t look like what they think a man or woman should look like. Some thoughts they might have include

    • That person is too tall to be a woman! They must really be a man pretending to be a woman! Someone call the police!
    • That woman has a deep voice, I bet she is really a man!
    • That woman has small boobs, I bet it’s a man!
    • That woman has facial hair, it’s a man! Protect the children!
    • That man has boobs; it must have been a woman, but it has a beard. What the hell is it?
    • That man sounds like a woman. I bet she tried to act like a man because she was such an ugly woman!

    These are just a few examples of the things I have heard or read. Most of the time, these things are said on Facebook or YouTube comments on a news story about someone who was just trying to use the restroom or play a sport.

    But what I have noticed is that while gay people are judged for actions (whether real or imaginary), transgender people are judged for how their body looks. Whether they are being judged by how tall or short they are, the sound of their voice, or the size of their breasts (why are people staring at other people’s chests so much?), the point of all these sayings is to insult people for how they look. What is the sin they are hating as they claim to love the sinner? Wait, is a woman sinning if she grows facial hair due to Polycystic Ovary Syndrome? What about these thoughts or words about the size of their breasts? Is having a certain size of boobs a sin? What is the correct breast size, and how does someone make their boobs bigger or smaller?

    More context is needed even to know what the sin is that they are referring to. Most of the time, this person is very vague on what the sin is. That is because they don’t really know any information about the person they are judging. This phrase is used mostly to strangers whom they don’t know.

    When someone speaks of “sin”, the context usually implies that they think the person has made an error or is doing something morally wrong. These two definitions get mixed up. I will call these definitions A and B.

    Sin Version A: Making a wrong move, such as moving a chess piece that causes the loss of the game, or forgetting a semicolon in a C program that you are compiling. Or perhaps “missing the mark” when you throw a ball or shoot an arrow at a target.

    Sin Version B: Doing something that hurts someone, such as murder, lying, stealing, or committing adultery (having sex with someone other than your spouse).

    Sin versions A and B are not the same thing, and they are not compatible. Sin A refers to a mistake made when playing a game or doing some action that has no harmful consequences. Sin B means you did something that hurt a person, either permanently by killing them, or at least temporarily, such as stealing their money that you can theoretically pay back.

    Interestingly, when people say “Love the sinner, hate the sin”, they are not usually talking about a type B of sin. They don’t usually say it about murderers, rapists, thieves, or liars. No, instead they call the police, bring a lawsuit against them, or cut off contact with them. Do they talk about loving these people? No, they are too busy trying to protect themselves from this person who has hurt them or their friends/family.

    But more importantly, can you still love someone while you are posting on Facebook about how much you hate someone’s sin? It is kind of a hard thing to balance. Love and hate don’t usually go in the same sentence. How about just loving the sinner and leaving it at that?

    But once again, you are calling someone a sinner, as if somehow they are more in the wrong than you are. It is still hypocritical to speak of your neighbor as someone you love in spite of their being a sinner. When a person says this, they are implying that they are perfect and somehow not being a sinner, and this gives them the right to call someone else a sinner.

    Matthew 7:1 "Do not judge so that you will not be judged. 2 For by the standard you judge you will be judged, and the measure you use will be the measure you receive. 3 Why do you see the speck in your brother’s eye, but fail to see the beam of wood in your own? 4 Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me remove the speck from your eye,’ while there is a beam in your own? 5 You hypocrite! First, remove the beam from your own eye, and then you can see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.

    It’s also worth mentioning that the statement “Love the sinner, hate the sin” only applies in the context of Christianity. Rarely do non-Christians ever use the word “sin”. However, the culture, most of which has been raised in one of the denominations of Christianity, understands that you are judging them, even if they are not sure what they are being judged for.

    The only advice I can give here is to stop using this phrase unless you are prepared to be very specific in what way you love someone, and also what sin it is that you hate. And PLEASE CHOOSE A DIFFERENT SIN ONCE IN A WHILE. The LGBTQIA+ people are tired of being picked on as if we are the only sinners. You would be wise to look at what sins you and many other self-identified “Christians” are doing while distracting themselves with the sins of others, so that they don’t have to change their own behavior. Remove all the sin from your own life, then we will talk.