Trying to find people to debate for online content

redraven · 2025-11-11T01:20:35-0600

I'm wondering if anyone has any recommendations on how I could find people willing and open
to debate -specifically Charlie Kirk's self proclaimed Christianity and how his behaviour often
contradicted the teachings of Christ and the Bible.

I want to establish a few things. First, I know this is a controversial subject. I am trying to find people who would be willing to defend Kirk. He seems to have a lot of supporters all over the internet, yet I haven't found a single one (granted I haven't asked very many) who is willing to defend him in a video recorded debate. Isn't that ironic? As I understand, he was generally open to different perspectives.

I am realistic also - I'm not someone with a huge social media following. I have 30 subscribers on Youtube. Hey, it's a start. Yet my relatively small following doesn't invalidate the quality of my opinions or arguments. It just means I don't have a large audience. That's critical in social media. People gravitate towards the larger platforms and it takes years to build a following. Someone may argue that someone with a larger following is less likely to take me seriously - and I understand that sentiment. Yet again I go back to the spirit of Charlie Kirk - shouldn't someone who defended him be open to debate as he was? I would view someones reluctance to debate and defend as a form of hypocrisy and a sign of weaker confidence.

In any event, I've asked a few 'celebrities' thus far without receiving acknowledgement. I reached out to Megyn Kelly and Dr. Phill. Haven't heard back and I admit it's unlikely they'd give me a platform. I did engage with a lesser known Youtube with a fairly substantial following - about 150k followers on Facebook. He was not willing to agree.

I am quite confident in my rhetorical abilities and ability to hold my own in any discussion I am prepared for. My intent would not be to insult or ridicule the other party for 'clicks', it would be to geniunely challenge Kirk's credibility in the face of established facts and contradictions. I feel very confident in my ability to achieve this.

Finally, I'll share a brief opinion piece I made today related to this subject:

Bradskii · 2025-11-11T01:33:39-0600

Rule Number 1: Don't read from a script if you do a Youtube vid.
Rule Number 2: Get an interesting background. Bookshelf or something.

Tip Number 1: Nobody is going to be interested in talking to a random dude with no followers about anything.

redraven · 2025-11-11T01:36:19-0600

Bradskii said:
Rule Number 1: Don't read from a script if you do a Youtube vid.
Rule Number 2: Get an interesting background. Bookshelf or something.

Tip Number 1: Nobody is going to be interested in talking to a random dude with no followers about anything.

Good catch, I was reading from a script, but I still think the message was very effective. This was unusual for me because most of my videos are ad lib. Second, I see your point - it's actually an excellent painting in the background - but I haven't invested a lot in the visuals of my videos. Unfortunately I live in a rather barren apartment. There is no bookshelf currently and I'm unsure if I'd want to invest in one.

For tip #1 - that appears to be the case so far, but it wouldn't be a reflection of my abilities.

Maria Billingsley · 2025-11-11T06:29:44-0600

redraven said:
I'm wondering if anyone has any recommendations on how I could find people willing and open
to debate -specifically Charlie Kirk's self proclaimed Christianity and how his behaviour often
contradicted the teachings of Christ and the Bible.

I want to establish a few things. First, I know this is a controversial subject. I am trying to find people who would be willing to defend Kirk. He seems to have a lot of supporters all over the internet, yet I haven't found a single one (granted I haven't asked very many) who is willing to defend him in a video recorded debate. Isn't that ironic? As I understand, he was generally open to different perspectives.

I am realistic also - I'm not someone with a huge social media following. I have 30 subscribers on Youtube. Hey, it's a start. Yet my relatively small following doesn't invalidate the quality of my opinions or arguments. It just means I don't have a large audience. That's critical in social media. People gravitate towards the larger platforms and it takes years to build a following. Someone may argue that someone with a larger following is less likely to take me seriously - and I understand that sentiment. Yet again I go back to the spirit of Charlie Kirk - shouldn't someone who defended him be open to debate as he was? I would view someones reluctance to debate and defend as a form of hypocrisy and a sign of weaker confidence.

In any event, I've asked a few 'celebrities' thus far without receiving acknowledgement. I reached out to Megyn Kelly and Dr. Phill. Haven't heard back and I admit it's unlikely they'd give me a platform. I did engage with a lesser known Youtube with a fairly substantial following - about 150k followers on Facebook. He was not willing to agree.

I am quite confident in my rhetorical abilities and ability to hold my own in any discussion I am prepared for. My intent would not be to insult or ridicule the other party for 'clicks', it would be to geniunely challenge Kirk's credibility in the face of established facts and contradictions. I feel very confident in my ability to achieve this.

Finally, I'll share a brief opinion piece I made today related to this subject:

Thanks for sharing. My two cents...
(knowing you're looking for a debate)

Reaching out to celebs is probably a bit too ambitious. If it were me , I would not introduce guests until you have an established platform that draws by your personality. Content becomes secondary.
Oh and please, please, please look at the camera! Ill subscribe!
Blessings

redraven · 2025-11-11T06:54:55-0600

Maria Billingsley said:
Thanks for sharing. My two cents...
(knowing you're looking for a debate)

Reaching out to celebs is probably a bit too ambitious. If it were me , I would not introduce guests until you have an established platform that draws by your personality. Content becomes secondary.
Oh and please, please, please look at the camera! Ill subscribe!
Blessings

Hello,
Thank-you so much for watching. It means a lot. I'm trying to find more meaning in my life which is why I made a video like this.
I'm trying to be productive. As far as the eye contact in the camera - you're right, I agree it makes for better connection with the audience.
At the same time - in fairness I do have autism and sometimes eye contact is inconsistent. I do see your point though.

I'm really on the fence as to what I should be doing and what kind of videos I should make - if any at all. I'd like to debate someone on a subject if the opportunity arises.. yet I am equally comfortable knowing my position without the need to broadcast it to others.

I can make videos about a variety of topics, but is it necessary to broadcast everything? There should be a purpose and meaning behind it. I was a professional musician for 10 years. Nowadays I only piano occasionally. I realize it won't be as good as it used to be and I don't feel there's much to prove anymore.

In summary, I really would like to figure out what I should be talking about for youtube - if anything. Maybe a subject to begin with is whether everything needs to be broadcast and whether debates are even necessary when you are confident in your position. I am involved in an employment dispute and have strong opinions on that, but I am reluctant to broadcast anything until it is resolved through legal channels.
That is a human rights issue which I feel strongly about yet also compromised as to what I can share.

Larniavc · 2025-11-11T07:32:21-0600

I’d do a debate here to practice.

redraven · 2025-11-11T07:37:46-0600

Larniavc said:
I’d do a debate here to practice.

With who? In what context? I wanted to debate over Zoom, not forum posts.

Larniavc · 2025-11-11T08:53:55-0600

redraven said:
With who? In what context? I wanted to debate over Zoom, not forum posts.

Yeah but it would be to practice. It would allow you to hone your argument and become aware of any exploitable facets of your position. It would be a rehearsal not the finished product.

PloverWing · 2025-11-11T10:48:53-0600

redraven said:
I'm wondering if anyone has any recommendations on how I could find people willing and open
to debate -specifically Charlie Kirk's self proclaimed Christianity and how his behaviour often
contradicted the teachings of Christ and the Bible.

I don't see the point of debating Charlie Kirk. Whether you liked his public statements or not, he's not saying them any more. He's gone.

Perhaps debate some current issue instead? "Churches who do X aren't following the teachings of Jesus", for some X that interests you.

Chesterton · 2025-11-11T11:32:55-0600

redraven said:
I'm wondering if anyone has any recommendations on how I could find people willing and open
to debate -specifically Charlie Kirk's self proclaimed Christianity and how his behaviour often
contradicted the teachings of Christ and the Bible.

I want to establish a few things. First, I know this is a controversial subject. I am trying to find people who would be willing to defend Kirk. He seems to have a lot of supporters all over the internet, yet I haven't found a single one (granted I haven't asked very many) who is willing to defend him in a video recorded debate. Isn't that ironic? As I understand, he was generally open to different perspectives.

I am realistic also - I'm not someone with a huge social media following. I have 30 subscribers on Youtube. Hey, it's a start. Yet my relatively small following doesn't invalidate the quality of my opinions or arguments. It just means I don't have a large audience. That's critical in social media. People gravitate towards the larger platforms and it takes years to build a following. Someone may argue that someone with a larger following is less likely to take me seriously - and I understand that sentiment. Yet again I go back to the spirit of Charlie Kirk - shouldn't someone who defended him be open to debate as he was? I would view someones reluctance to debate and defend as a form of hypocrisy and a sign of weaker confidence.

In any event, I've asked a few 'celebrities' thus far without receiving acknowledgement. I reached out to Megyn Kelly and Dr. Phill. Haven't heard back and I admit it's unlikely they'd give me a platform. I did engage with a lesser known Youtube with a fairly substantial following - about 150k followers on Facebook. He was not willing to agree.

I am quite confident in my rhetorical abilities and ability to hold my own in any discussion I am prepared for. My intent would not be to insult or ridicule the other party for 'clicks', it would be to geniunely challenge Kirk's credibility in the face of established facts and contradictions. I feel very confident in my ability to achieve this.

Finally, I'll share a brief opinion piece I made today related to this subject:

Rule Number 1: Read from a script. It's much better for expressing concise, accurate thoughts.
Rule Number 2: Don't worry about anything as superfluous as a background unless you just want to be entertaining. The YouTuber Styxhex just recently surpassed half a billion views and he's never used a background of any interest.

It's against the rules on CF to question another member's Christian faith. I think the same should apply to public figures such as Kirk also. I'm not a Kirk expert, but I'd possibly be willing to debate another topic, except I don't own a camera.

Bradskii said:
Tip Number 1: Nobody is going to be interested in talking to a random dude with no followers about anything.

Do you realize that in saying that, you just talked to him?

Hans Blaster · 2025-11-11T13:06:23-0600

PloverWing said:
I don't see the point of debating Charlie Kirk.

It wouldn't really be fair as he can't fight back.

PloverWing said:
Whether you liked his public statements or not, he's not saying them any more. He's gone.

Perhaps debate some current issue instead? "Churches who do X aren't following the teachings of Jesus", for some X that interests you.

redraven · 2025-11-11T14:03:44-0600

Chesterton said:
Rule Number 1: Read from a script. It's much better for expressing concise, accurate thoughts.
Rule Number 2: Don't worry about anything as superfluous as a background unless you just want to be entertaining. The YouTuber Styxhex just recently surpassed half a billion views and he's never used a background of any interest.

It's against the rules on CF to question another member's Christian faith. I think the same should apply to public figures such as Kirk also. I'm not a Kirk expert, but I'd possibly be willing to debate another topic, except I don't own a camera.

Do you realize that in saying that, you just talked to him?

I acknowledge that he claimed himself to be a Christian. I view his association with Christianity to be disingenuous given his rhetoric. That's how it appeared to me.

Chesterton · 2025-11-11T14:06:58-0600

redraven said:
I acknowledge that he claimed himself to be a Christian. I view his association with Christianity to be disingenuous given his rhetoric. That's how it appeared to me.

Are you an atheist? I know atheists will often call themselves freethinkers.

redraven · 2025-11-11T14:08:22-0600

Chesterton said:
Are you an atheist? I know atheists will often call themselves freethinkers.

No. Are you?

Chesterton · 2025-11-11T14:14:57-0600

redraven said:
No. Are you?

No. If you look under a person's avatar, you can see how they label themselves.

redraven · 2025-11-11T14:37:12-0600

I made this which I hope is informative to others in this discussion:

Chesterton · 2025-11-11T15:04:55-0600

redraven said:
I made this which I hope is informative to others in this discussion:

I listened to the first four minutes. Honestly, I'm not very interested in Kirk's faith. It's not a "hot topic" for me, maybe it is for others. I'd be more interested in a debate about whether William Shakespeare was a Catholic or a Protestant.

But, to clarify, when I said the rule here should apply to public figures I wasn't making any argument, just offering my opinion. In a similar vein, if my next door neighbor claims that they are a Christian, or an atheist, or a Hindu, I don't see any point in calling that into question, apart from any good need to do so.

Also, I have zero interest in whether you have an opinion about Kirk. You be you, and good luck with it.

Michie · 2025-11-11T15:07:59-0600

Weird.

Chesterton · 2025-11-11T15:10:11-0600

Michie said:
Weird.

C'mon, didn't you call me weird in the other thread?! (So many did I lost track.) ^_^

Fervent · 2025-11-11T15:17:17-0600

What is it about Kirk that has you interested in demeaning him?

It might be more effective if instead of focusing on Kirk personally, you shift your focus to Turning Point since that at least is an ongoing movement rather than being something that is past and not relevant moving forward.

Trying to find people to debate for online content

Active Member

Old age should burn and rave at close of day;

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

"Larniavc sir, how are you so smart?"

Active Member

"Larniavc sir, how are you so smart?"

Episcopalian

Whats So Funny bout Peace Love and Understanding

I march with Sherman

Active Member

Whats So Funny bout Peace Love and Understanding

Active Member

Whats So Funny bout Peace Love and Understanding

Active Member

Whats So Funny bout Peace Love and Understanding

Well-Known Member

Whats So Funny bout Peace Love and Understanding

Well-Known Member

Similar threads