Charlie Kirk is absolutely brilliant, especially when facing off with college students in this public debates. Credit to both sides on this one, Charlie is always a class act but I thought the student did well in this one too, and both sides stayed above-board and handled themselves with class. Charlie got the upper-hand by a country mile, but the kid did his best and did so admirably, even going over to shake Charlie’s hand at the end. We need more of this in our country. More debate. More speech. More conversation. More exchange of ideas. I think you’re going to enjoy this, and I’ll put the full transcript down below too. Here you go: “The Violinist” is a gruesome analogy used by the pro choice mafia in an attempt to make the pro life stance look unreasonable, but it shows how unreasonable the abortion argument really is at it’s core. The analogy asserts that murder is okay if you feel inconvenienced. There is… pic.twitter.com/kr2RmDrZZn — Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) June 6, 2025 FULL TRANSCRIPT: Student:I wanted to ask you about something you’ve probably never talked about. Never.Uh, yeah—abortion. Charlie Kirk:Oh yeah.Now if you make an argument I’ve never heard, I will give you great credit. Student:Uh, so uh, yeah. I wanted to basically try to determine whether you—uh, as you’ve, I believe, suggested—believe that abortion in case of rape should be illegal because of the right to life being absolute.Or that it’s—the right to life is supposed to be weighted against autonomy and freedom,but just the burden of carrying a child of a rapist is simply insufficient to justify abortion. And uh, if I may, I would use a thought experiment for that. Charlie Kirk:Is it the violinist? Student:Uh, a modified version of it. Charlie Kirk:Yeah, see, I’ve heard it all, man.So you gotta—it’s Oxford, you gotta go deeper, man. Student:Well, well it—it’s a—I’m gonna be honest, like, I got hundreds of hours on this topic.Give me something I haven’t heard before. Charlie Kirk:Okay, good. Student:Uh, the question is whether you would—If anyone doesn’t know the argument, I’m gonna just spell it out in the modified version. So the Society of Music Lovers has determined that your wife is the only person that can save the life of a famous violinist.They have kidnapped her.And his—and uh, their circulatory systems are currently attached.She can detach from the violinist, it will be safe for her, but it will lead to the violinist’s death. The question is: would you be willing to force her to stay attached to the violinist for 9 months?And then, uh, the next question is: would your answer change if, uh, it was 10, 11, 12 months, her whole life?If perhaps she was supposed to be bedridden for the whole time to increase—to—for—for the sake of, well, seeing what happens if the burden significantly increases. Charlie Kirk:Well the second part of the question is irrelevant,because it’s only for 9 months, so keep it applicable to the topic at hand, correct?Yeah.Otherwise it’s—it’s a completely irrelevant moral question. Secondly, um, just to be clear, um,you’re not bed—you’re not—you’re not kidnapped when you get pregnant,so I don’t quite understand the analogy, right? Uh, number three: yes. I mean, if the—If the—In this—I always found this—this, like, this analogy outrageous.If you’re asking me or my wife,my wife would answer,“If I have to suffer for 9 months so that another being will assuredly get life,I will do that.”That’s how she would answer. Student:Yeah.So the—the question is, uh, whether the right to life is absolute— Charlie Kirk:It is. Student:—or whether some level of inconvenience can be taken into account—or rather burden can be taken into account and weighed against it. In this case, I’m asking, what if it was, for example, for her whole life?Because what if— Charlie Kirk:It’s not a relevant—I haven’t thought deeply about it, honestly.But it’s not relevant, ’cause pregnancy is at a 9-month window.So it’s not relevant to my abortion view. Student:Well, but—Well the burden is also different of being attached to someone—a violinist—The burden is completely different to be—to carrying a rapist’s—uh—uh—child of a rapist. So I do acknowledge that the burdens are different.But I guess—The question is whether there is a—a burden that could be weighed against the—the right to life. And if in this case, uh, you just believe that the burden—Only—the only burden would be life of the mother. So you would force your wife—F—okay, look—You would be willing— Charlie Kirk:Hold on a second.No—I—I would be willing to do whatever is necessary to not have a human being eliminated. And I guess—is it a human being in the womb, yes or no? Student:Yes. Charlie Kirk:Then why don’t you get the human being rights? Student:Well, that’s what I’m trying to just— Charlie Kirk:No—ask—ask the question.Why does that human not get rights and you do? Student:Well, uh—uh—my—my question is— Charlie Kirk:No—answer the question.Why do you get rights and the baby doesn’t? Student:I’m not saying it doesn’t. Charlie Kirk:Yeah.The right to life—eliminate it.That’s the first and most fundamental right of the West.Why don’t you give that right to the baby? Student:Well, I’m not saying I’m not. Charlie Kirk:Yes you are. Student:No I’m not.I’m asking whether you would force your wife— Charlie Kirk:Well, hold on a second.Do you—Very fundamentally, do you believe that every human being has a right to life regardless of how small you are or what level of development that you are on? Student:I do believe that every person does have a right to life, yes. Charlie Kirk:You do not believe that. Student:I do. Charlie Kirk:Okay then we agree.Abortion should be eliminated and outlawed. Student:Yeah.And you would force your mother—You—you’re—sorry—force your wife to stay with a violinist— Charlie Kirk:Again, I’ve—Attached to a violinist for her life—You are gruesomely describing a universal truththat we will protect life no matter how small or level of developmentand the environment or the degree of dependency. And again, I will throw it back to you,’cause it’s very easy to use this analogy to make it seem like I’m unreasonable,but you’re actually the unreasonable one here saying that“I will eliminate the human being just because…”For what reason? There is no excuse for murder. Period.We believe that in the West, correct? Now you want to make the self-defense argument, we can go back there.I’ve heard every argument. That—I’ve heard that the baby is a parasite.I’ve heard the baby’s an invader.I’ve heard the baby that is, you know, currently taking the nutrients. None of them are morally applicable to the actual circumstance of gestation. Period.Every human being has a right to life. You can check your notes again if you’d like,but every human being has a right to life.Yes or no?It’s what built the West. Student:Well it’s—it’s what I’m asking.It—it’s the only thing I wanted to ask.Would you force your wife— Charlie Kirk:Got it.You—you got your answer. Student:No, I understand. Charlie Kirk:What you are doing is a rhetorical trap.I’ve answered it completely, which is this:I stand for the abolition of abortion in all circumstancesagainst life of the mother because life matters. Every human being I believe is made in the image of the divine,is sacred,is unique. And if we get away from this principle, as we have,we not only have moral degradation,we not only have the collapsing society around us,but it’s bad for that being itself. That being itself is unique.That being has rights.And who are we to say just because we’re older that we get to murder it? Thank you. Full screen video player here with captions added if you prefer: Charlie Kirk Brilliantly Exposes “The Violinist” pic.twitter.com/5A48yoNiKF — Noah Christopher (@DailyNoahNews) June 6, 2025