Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Fact check: Did Charlie Kirk say that people should be stoned?
1. Summary of the results
The claim that Charlie Kirk said people should be stoned is not supported by most analyses. According to [1], Stephen King falsely claimed Charlie Kirk advocated for stoning gay people to death, and King later apologized for the false claim, indicating that there is no evidence to support the statement that Charlie Kirk said people should be stoned [1]. Other sources, such as [2] and [3], do not mention Charlie Kirk advocating for stoning, instead focusing on the reactions to his death and the subsequent fallout, providing no evidence to support or contradict the claim [2] [3]. However, [4] supports the claim that Charlie Kirk said people should be stoned, as he referenced a Bible passage that says 'thou shall lay with another man shall be stoned to death' in the context of discussing gay people [4].
- Key findings from the analyses include:
Most sources do not provide evidence to support the claim that Charlie Kirk said people should be stoned [1] [2] [3] [5] [6]
One source supports the claim, citing a Bible passage referenced by Charlie Kirk [4]
Some sources focus on the aftermath of Charlie Kirk's assassination and the reactions of various individuals and institutions, without mentioning the claim [2] [3] [5] [6]
**2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints**
The analyses provided **lack context** about Charlie Kirk's overall views and statements on the topic of stoning or LGBTQ+ rights. For example, [4] provides a specific quote from Charlie Kirk, but it is **unclear if this quote is taken out of context** or if it represents his overall views on the topic [4]. Additionally, **alternative viewpoints** from Charlie Kirk's supporters or opponents are not well-represented in the analyses, which could provide a more **nuanced understanding** of the claim.
Missing context includes:
Charlie Kirk's overall views and statements on the topic of stoning or LGBTQ+ rights
The context in which Charlie Kirk referenced the Bible passage, as mentioned in [4]
Alternative viewpoints from Charlie Kirk's supporters or opponents
**3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement**
The original statement **may be misleading** due to the **lack of evidence** from most sources, as well as the **potential for bias** in the sources that do support the claim. For example, [4] may be **selectively presenting information** that supports the claim, while ignoring other statements or context that could contradict it [4]. Additionally, the sources that do not mention the claim, such as [2] and [3], may be **focusing on other aspects** of Charlie Kirk's death and legacy, rather than providing a comprehensive view of his views on stoning or LGBTQ+ rights.
Potential misinformation or bias includes:
The lack of evidence from most sources to support the claim
The potential for selective presentation of information in sources that support the claim, such as [4]