I gotta be honest, “It’s just an opinion” is becoming a VERY overused and abused sentence on the internet.

In a space where petty YouTube drama is put in the same category as atrocities across the globe, it’s no surprise that we’d naturally start caring a bit less about what people say online. After all, social media isn’t a place where you’d go for particularly thought-provoking content or information on complex topics (or it at least shouldn’t be your first choice for it). On the internet, everything is a short-term joke or trend that we’ll be done with in a week, so there’s no use dwelling on what people say, right?

Well….that’s the issue. As I said, the internet, as we know it, is typically a breeding ground for experimentation. Most of us just use it to be entertained. However, some people use their platforms and audiences to shift away from a fun and carefree vibe and delve into some darker areas.

Okay, there are a million things I could be talking about, so I’ll just spill it: We’ve become alarmingly desensitized to A LOT on the internet. So much so, we’re allowing for a lot of things to slide that our parents and grandparents would’ve known were inexcusable. And that’s where “It’s just an opinion” comes in.

Image Credit: Mick Haupt from Pexels

See, I’ve noticed this a lot already, but the recent passing of right-wing influencer Charlie Kirk has made me realize that we’ve completely forgotten the power of words.

First, I’ll preface this by saying that Kirk’s death was unfortunate and something that definitely didn’t need to occur. However, Kirk’s platform was built on misinformation and hate rhetoric, so it’s a bit jarring to hear people dismiss his words as “just opinions”… especially when his “opinions” typically involved warped (and debunked) statistics and a lot of disrespect towards communities he looked down on (which by the way, were targeted once he died. One example being HBCUs having to go on lockdown due to bomb threats).

This isn’t to dismiss or justify what happened to him, by the way, but to point out that the way someone died is not a good reason to downplay or ignore the negative impact they had in life. Morality debates aside, it’s just very disingenuous and dances around the facts.

We can acknowledge that Charlie Kirk didn’t deserve what happened to him, AND that the hatred he spread was not okay! That's nuance! Labelling views like Kirk's as "just opinions" strips away that nuance and contributes to existing tensions that may lead to future conflicts. Speaking of….

The Very Real Consequences of Mislabeled Opinions

You know that old saying, “Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me?" Well, turns out that’s pretty untrue! Especially given the times we’re in (though I will say, history has PLENTY of proof to show the harm done in the name of “opinions." So this isn’t completely the internet’s fault).

This is where incitement, one of the few cases where free speech is unprotected by the First Amendment, kicks in. According to FIRE (The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression), incitement is “speech that is both ‘directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action." We’ve seen quite a few cases like this in the past few years; however, incitement is considered a very complex legal topic. Even in cases that met the categories of this definition, incitement charges weren’t added.

For this article, I’ll still be including relevant examples that abide by FIRE’s definition, regardless of whether or not an incitement charge was added. You're all free to respectfully discuss and debate in the comments, but I specifically wanted to touch upon the harm that was brought to victims of these cases.

Image Credit: Mikhail Nilov from Pexels

1. The January 6th Insurrection (2021)

This was honestly one of the most unfortunate days in American history, and it's still fresh in the minds of many American citizens and our international friends and neighbors. I remember watching this unfurl live with my family as thousands of Trump supporters and members of white supremacist groups stormed the U.S. Capitol, claiming that the election had been rigged.

On that day, I saw terrified soldiers having to flee from crowds brandishing homemade weapons and hear horrifying chants of vengeance against those the crowd believed were traitors (guards defending the Capitol, members of Congress counting the election votes, and former Vice President Mike Pence). However, something I hadn't seen much of was a proper response from President Trump, who would later refer to the day as "a day of love."

According to Britannica, Trump had given a speech to a rally crowd earlier that day in which he continued to repeat that the election had been stolen from him. This had already been proven untrue by experts, but he still called on Pence to block Congress's confirmation of the electoral vote, and if he didn't, then the rally crowd would not let the confirmation take place. In his own words, he encouraged the crowd to "walk down Pennsylvania Avenue" and to fight or else "you're not going to have a country anymore."

Now, while Trump did face incitement charges and impeachment from the House of Representatives, these were ultimately dismissed due to the legal challenges and overall difficulty of proving incitement (see, I told you this was complex). Perhaps this will be challenged in the future, but regardless of whether or not Trump directly caused the chaos or simply added gasoline to the fire, we can't deny that his words definitely didn't help the situation.

Image Credit: Kurt Kaiser from Wikimedia Commons

2. Springfield Haitian Immigrants Faced Bomb Threats Due To False Claims (Sept. 2024)

"They're eating the cats, they're eating the dogs!"

This was an absurd and memeable claim made by Donald Trump during the 2024 Presidential Debates. While candidates Trump and Kamala Harris were talking about immigration, Trump made it a point to accuse Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Illinois, of stealing and eating pets in the neighborhood, and justified his claim because he had seen it on the news.

In actuality, this claim originated from Erika Lee, a woman who posted on Facebook about a neighbor's cat that had gone missing. According to NBC News, her post also mentioned that, "...the neighbor told Lee she thought the cat was the victim of an attack by her Haitian neighbors." And thus was the beginning of an unfortunate lie.

Now, to give credit where credit is due, Lee didn't seem to post this with malicious intent, but rather misinterpreted what her neighbor, Kimberly Newton, had said (who would also report that Lee misstated her story). And while Lee does regret the harm her post has done, it has unfortunately not stopped political opportunists and racists from continuing to push this debunked narrative.

A PBS News article even reported this:

"J.D. Vance, for his part, said on CNN this weekend that he had to create stories about immigrants in Springfield so that people would pay attention to the larger immigration debate."

Image Credit: Gage Skidmore from Wikimedia Commons

And no, this wasn't "just politics" or "controversial statements." When Vance was met with criticism for continuing to help promote these false, racist narratives, he wrote this on an X post to his followers: "In short, don't let the crybabies in the media dissuade you, fellow patriots. Keep the cat memes flowing." (This is the conclusion of a longer series of similar ignorance and immaturity, so if you want more context, it'll be in this article here).

But of course, by ignoring the "crybabies in the media", Vance also got to dodge facing the horrid reality he helped push for. Not only did Springfield Haitians receive multiple threats of violence to important places in their communities, but the Springfield Police Division was repeatedly receiving false reports due to the consistent pushing of this lie. Jason Via, the deputy director of public safety and operations, told NPR that, "We get these reports, 'the Haitians are killing ducks in a lot of our parks' or 'the Haitians are eating vegetables right out of the aisle at the grocery store.' And we haven't really seen any of that. It's really frustrating. As a community, it's not helpful as we try to move forward."

By the way, wanna know something about Springfield's Haitian immigrants? They're here legally, according to Springfield officials and multiple immigration lawyers. Vance wasn't even helping his own cause; he just doubled down on the fact that immigration policies in this country are racist jokes...kinda like he is.

Image Credit: Germar Derron from Pexels

3. Nazi Rally Chants, "White Men, Fight Back!" After the Charlie Kirk shooting (Sept. 2025)

As I mentioned earlier, Charlie Kirk's statements were not just "controversial" or "political opinions," and this proves it. Just a few days after his death, we're seeing a rise in white supremacist activity, which, quite frankly, speaks VOLUMES about the audience he catered to and cultivated. And yet, instead of acknowledging this, we're consistently praising him and forcing a rose-tinted glasses view of him onto anyone who decided to "reach across the aisle."

In times like these, people continue to push the idea that we all just need to get along and respect each other's political beliefs. However, it's never been more blatantly obvious that we need to work on respecting PEOPLE! You don't get peace by pretending to care for or respect opinions that basically state, "I don't think x group is equal/should exist", you get peace with the mindset of "I may believe this, but x group are still people worthy of respect and kindness."

And unfortunately, Kirk made a career out of perpetuating disrespect towards marginalized groups, which naturally attracts unpleasant crowds like the one in this example. Here are a few examples of some very "hot takes" that made Kirk an idol to this crowd:

• Black women are moronic/less intelligent than white men, and they take jobs from qualified white people (Kirk was specifically referencing Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson). - Claims like this have fueled misconceptions regarding DEI policies, and have essentially made it more socially acceptable to harass and look down on people of color in the workforce (wow, not like this wasn't a huge issue before DEI policies). And of course, this scrutiny just gets 100x crueller when a black woman makes it to a place Charlie Kirk was never qualified to be considered for, or even speak on, for that matter.
• "If 1 in 5 women have been r*ped, then they're lying!" - In a debate with college students, Kirk was told this statistic and responded with this....pretty terrible and classless retort. Given Kirk's track record with statistics, I'm not surprised he was wrong. But more so, his immediate willingness to downplay and justify harm to women. I would've respected this a bit more if he had asked for a source, but because reality didn't fit with his worldview, he resorted to malice. ( He also said women shouldn't get to revoke consent, so take that as you will.)
• "Immigrants are criminals" - Yeah, this take isn't unique to Charlie Kirk, but it doesn't change the fact that he spent a good portion of his career labeling immigrants as criminals or gang members. And because of this tireless, repetitive narrative intended to scare voters into voting for certain politicians, immigrants are the ones who get the short end of the stick. Which is interesting because after the recent crackdowns on immigrants, we found that most are far from criminals and are, in fact, a valuable asset to our nation. Don't believe me? Well, even the Trump administration had to back off on ICE raids after farmers were struggling. (Interesting, right? Such "violent criminals" just so happen to be the backbone of our country and the very reason we have fresh produce.)
• MUCH, MUCH MORE! I'm ending this list here, but there was plenty of homophobia, transphobia, sexism, racism, and loads of general ignorance that I'm surprised is continuously labeled as "politics" instead of pure bias.

By the way, I feel as though someone is going to bring this up, so let me just say this: Context makes none of this better, so don't tell me I'm lacking any. These quotes were simply just the more shocking pieces in an already hate-filled puzzle, and if Kirk had been making any legitimate points with any of these quotes, then that's what would've been remembered. Context also doesn't dismiss or justify bigotry!

The fact that these are the quotes that define his legacy tells us quite a lot about who he was as a person. Not "controversial", just hateful.

Image Credit: Charles Criscuolo from Pexels

So, why is this pretty much the worst outcome on this list? Well, because Charlie Kirk spent a good portion of his career villainizing people he hardly knew or interacted with, guess who got blamed for him getting shot? Yep, before any evidence of who the actual shooter was: the left (and let's be real: specifically the trans, black, and immigrant communities! We always gotta be the scapegoats for something, huh?).

Now, with all this consistent vilification and disrespect that has been naively labeled as "political differences," who do you think is going to be the targets for this kind of crowd?

Regardless of whether or not you watched the video, the answer is pretty obvious: marginalized people and their allies! Yeah, Kirk's "opinions" are now OUR problem because they inspired an alarming portion of his audience to target people who had nothing to do with Kirk's death (and no, I don't care for the whole "Not all of us are doing this!" plea.

The fact that there are even entire groups of Nazi's in Kirk's audience to begin with tells me a lot about the platform Kirk cultivated, especially since so many of them were very quick to defend his hatred or blame others for his death and then try to rally against marginalized communities.)

Even if some members in his audience condemn this, listening to and encouraging his rhetoric makes them complicit/accomplices to this. If there's truly anything different about the men in the video and anyone in Kirk's audience who claims to condemn this, it won't be seen with hollow words, but with action.

All the time spent talking about having empathy for Kirk would've been infinitely better spent just...acknowledging the flaws in Kirk and Fuentes' rhetoric. Of course, because we don't do this, those with no involvement in Kirk's death are going to be put in dangerous positions. And before you hit me with the ever-growingly useless, "thoughts and prayers", just know that this has already happened.

On September 16th, a Mississippi student was lynched on campus, and, insultingly, the death was ruled as a suicide rather than taken with the seriousness the situation deserves. Additionally, as of September 18th, the FBI is preparing to label trans people and their allies as "violent extremists" and "domestic terrorists." And on September 24th, Charlie Kirk fans were escorted out of Tennessee State University’s campus for bothering the students and trying to continue Kirk's legacy of debating whether or not people should exist. And unsurprisingly, it doesn't seem that law enforcement or our government is preparing to take action about it.

Take the Quiz: Religion, Schools, and Equality

Religion in Schools: Teaching Respect, Not Bias.

Okay, That’s Not Good — But How Did Words Cause This?

Well, "sticks and stones may break your bones, but the right words can absolutely get someone else to hurt you." As we've seen in the above examples that I had the energy to pull together (there are PLENTY more cases by the way, these are simply the ones in recent memory), the key catalyst for each event was that opinions, or really biases, were being presented as facts. Speaking of, let's differentiate the two so you can better identify which is which!

Opinion: A view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge. (Ex: I think root beer is the best soda).

Bias: Prejudice in favor of or against one thing, person, or group compared with another, usually in a way considered to be unfair. (Ex: Authorities stopping people based on race. By the way, that’s actually something the Supreme Court recently ruled that ICE could do. Be careful!)

So to recap, an opinion is typically broader and doesn’t often concern people (at least not entire groups of people. You’d still have an opinion if you said you liked or disliked a teacher you had. A bias is a negative judgment regarding groups of people, often for things outside of their control, and also, often not relevant to their character.

And unfortunately, on the internet, we’ve been seeing A LOT of assumptions being perpetuated about certain groups of people, especially with the current political atmosphere. Even worse, the internet allows for entire careers to be made by spreading hatred and lies about certain groups of people (Andrew Tate being a prime example).

And sadly, we’re not properly condemning many of these occurrences as we should. They’re either taken way too far (cancel culture) or completely ignored, or worse, justified, which is how things like casual racism grow to be as mainstream as it is now.

Image Credit: Tima Miroshnichenko from Pexels

However, this misrepresentation isn't the only cause, and it may not even be the primary cause. See, there are other factors we have to consider, some rooted in psychology and others in politics. For example, in each of the examples, we've seen a lot of insistence that out-groups (people who don't share your identity) are terrifying enemies that will destroy everything someone holds dear. This claim seems silly and may warrant an eye roll on the surface, but consider how it's being reinforced.

This is where politics comes in. Authority figures such as Donald Trump, J.D. Vance, and sources such as Fox News and other sensationalized publications or social media posts continue to push the idea by stating that many horrific things are because of out-groups (i.e. crime, the state of the economy, job security, education, etc.). And we know how the saying goes, "If you repeat a lie enough times, it'll eventually become the truth." This is because by repeating certain narratives, a "pattern" seemingly emerges and convinces people that the lie is real.

In reality, it doesn't change the fact that there's typically never any evidence to support the out-group slander, but tactics like dedicating entire news segments to how one immigrant committed a violent crime (while conveniently ignoring the many that occur in sundown towns across the United States) or making false accusations that drive people into a panic (like Trump's insistence that the left killed Charlie Kirk BEFORE getting evidence) aid the process significantly.

You can see one of the more alarming ways this can manifest in the video below. I had to watch this for my Ideologies at the Extremes class, and in it, a journalist recounts what he saw when he was amongst Neo-Nazi groups. It's really eye-opening and shows some other factors at play that I didn't get to touch on in this article.

Conclusion

If you're going to take away anything from this article, I'm hoping you'll at least be more aware of biases masquerading as opinions. I know that many of us couldn't have foreseen these outcomes or wanted them to happen, but we will only continue to see more instances like these until we learn to recognize the pattern of how they start. Remember, genuine opinions should never result in any lies, threats, or harm to others!

And the sooner we grow to discontinue mislabeling hatred as such, the sooner we can move forward in our society and have less tension and conflict. Seriously, if we want to see more empathy and harmony in our society, we should start with smaller, actionable steps like this.

For now, let's not hyper-fixate on the opposing viewpoints in our society and instead focus on decreasing hatred and misinformation and proceeding with decency. The maximum amount of effort here may involve some fact-checking or starting a conversation, but really, you'll mostly get to continue as you already have, just with more mindfulness.