Posted on 09/21/2025 7:13:12 AM PDT by nikos1121
The U.S. Capitol has been considered the most suitable place for the nation to pay final tribute to its most eminent citizens by having their remains lay in state (in the case of government officials and military officers) or in honor (in the case of private citizens).
If his family agrees, then I believe that both houses of Congress should authorize the Archetect of the Capitol (AOC) SHOULD arrange for a ceremony that honors Charlie Kirk in the Rotunda.
Was just watching Maria Bartaromo’s “Sunday Morning Futures”, and after one her guests talked about Charlie Kirk’s life and legacy, Maria was clearly trying not to show her tears.
Then, she made a bold statement about how important it is that we honor and and celebrate Charlie Kirk for his love for our country and his strong CHRISTIAN faith.
Yes, I saw that also.
I support this honor.
This man turned the next generation back to the foundation of America - and died a martyr.
Not the Rotunda, Lincoln Memorial. As befits both men sacrificed for their country.
Charlie Kirk was great and he died horrifically and he deserves a proper send off and he's getting one, I think in DC it will be a political show, with protestors and the like and his mourning family doesn't need that.
You are really comparing Charlie Kirk to Lincoln?
I understand how the Lincoln process went. But that was 160 years ago, transportation and communication worked differently.
I understand that the memorial today is happening and I do not want to be disrespectful. I simply think pushing for his body to lay in the rotunda is pushing this too far. It’s as if the right is itching to rub this in the left’s face. That is not a good place to be.
I agree. Republicans in Oklahoma proposed legislation this week that would require all public universities in the state to implement Charlie Kirk memorials or face fines. I can’t believe he would have wanted that.
I don’t know what Charlie Kirk would want. I was aware of him and saw him on television numerous times, but I honestly learned most of what I know about him since he died.
Beyond the pledge of allegiance in public school, which I agree with, I just don’t think government should dictate to people who and what to honor.
"Never take your foot off the gas!" some on our side are currently saying.
Yet if you never take your foot off the gas, you risk driving over a cliff.
I saw an article yesterday where there's a petition to put Charlie Kirk's favorite drink on the Starbuck's menu.
That's simply too much. Name a street after him in his hometown. That's fine. Heck, erect a statue or two (George Floyd has them). That's fine as well.
I just think it's important to know when to put your foot on the gas and when to throttle back. Push it too far, and we risk minimizing Kirk's brutal, violent murder by commodifying it.
I’m afraid some people are playing politics with this death.
“Never take your foot off the gas!” some on our side are currently saying.
——————
And when I read that (and hear it) I know that somewhere, someone, is pushing buttons.
I hear the same types of stuff from the left. You hear it once in the morning. By the end of the day, the phrase is coming from all of the robots.
We need to be careful to understand who is pushing the buttons and what they want to accomplish.
Yeah, it's really bad on X, between the bots and the "MAGA_Patriot_1776" accounts posting from Jaipur and Mumbai.
This is the CONSERVATIVE MLK MOMENT.
This is going to be much more than the sum of the parts.
Do not impede this.
Allow it to grow. and Thrive!
Any ceremony at the Capitol would only fan flames. This ceremony in Arizona is tribute enough.
I wasn’t trying to compare Charlie to Abe. I just was pointing out a case where the funeral of a beloved person stretched out for a while in response to someone who was saying they didn’t like the long, drawn out remembrances very much.
I would only compare Charlie to Pres Lincoln in the sense that he was beloved by millions who also wanted to pay their respects.
You’re the second person to point out the error of comparing the two figures, so I have to assume my writing gave that impression. I did not mean that. I was replying to someone who was uncomfortable with a long, drawn out process of mourning and using the Lincoln example to show that there is some precedent for letting as many Americans as possible pay respects to a very beloved figure.
Understood.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.