Those of us who were ignorant of Charlie Kirk expected that his background would back up the posthumous honorifics. Instead, what we see is the story of a man who went out of his way to sow division based on race, gender, and religion.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on September 22, 2025.

OTTAWA—Until just recently, the only famous Kirk I knew was Captain Kirk from Star Trek, which first launched on the CTV network in Canada in 1966.

But on Sept. 10, the murder of American Charlie Kirk, co-founder of Turning Point USA, on the campus of Utah Valley University reverberated around the world.

The president of the United States ordered all government flags to be lowered in mourning, and announced the posthumous provision of the Presidential Medal of Freedom for the slain political activist.

Those of us who were ignorant of Kirk expected that his background would back up the honorifics.

Instead, what we see is the story of a man who went out of his way to sow division based on race, gender, and religion.

Media Matters for America, a not-for-profit that tracks conservative media statements, published the following direct quotes from Kirk’s appearances and podcasts.

He had this to say about Black people: “Happening all the time in urban America, prowling Blacks go around for fun to go target white people, that’s a fact. It’s happening more and more.”

On former First Lady Michelle Obama, he had this to say: “If we said that Joy Reid and Michelle Obama … were affirmative action picks, we would have been called racists. Now they’re coming out and they’re saying it for us. …You do not have the brain processing power to otherwise be taken seriously. You had to go steal a white person’s slot to go be taken somewhat seriously.” Not sure how Obama stole a white person’s slot as her partner was elected by a majority vote, but it was this kind of racist vitriol that attracted attention to Kirk.

As for women, in a discussion of musician Taylor Swift’s engagement to footballer Travis Kelce, Kirk said: “reject feminism. Submit to your husband Taylor. You’re not in charge.”

Kirk also said that if he had a 10-year-old daughter who was raped, he would force her to carry the fetus to term: “Yes. The baby would be born.”

He also promoted access to guns, suggesting that “it’s worth it to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the Second Amendment to protect our other God-given rights. That is a prudent deal. It is rational.”

On religion, Kirk said he believed “Islam is the sword the left is using to slit the throat of America.” He also did not support the separation of church and state, claiming the concept is “a fabrication, a fiction, it’s not in the constitution. It’s made up by secular humanists.”

As for his views on the LGBTQ+ communities, “We need to have a Nuremburg-style trial for every gender-affirming clinic doctor. We need it immediately.”

On immigration, he said he believed that “America was at its peak when we halted immigration for 40 years and we dropped our foreign-born percentage to its lowest level ever.”

So why are so many people being excoriated—even fired—for criticizing Kirk after death? And why is Donald Trump trying to convince the country and the world that Kirk is a patriot, and that his assassin was a crazed liberal?

Why was Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre upset that Prime Minister Mark Carney did not post a condolence message quickly enough after the murder?

All party leaders eventually posted messages, generally referencing Kirk’s family and the fact that differences in political perspective should not be met with violence.

Of course, that is self-evident, but in the case of Kirk, he deliberately provoked reactions by the nature of his absurd racist, homophobic, and misogynistic statements.

Kirk on the former president: “Joe Biden is a bumbling, dementia-filled, Alzheimer’s-corrupt tyrant who should honestly be put in prison and/or given the death penalty for his crimes against America.”

There is never an excuse for politicians to solve problems with a weapon. That is one of the reasons why the majority of Americans want the government to promote gun control.

While innocent people—including children—are slaughtered almost every week in America by crazed individuals, Kirk spent his life lobbying against limiting that access.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

In this tense global environment, people around the world look to Canada as a country where people have learned to celebrate their differences, not revile them. 

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on June 30, 2025.

OTTAWA—It’s hard to believe that this Canada Day marks a quarter century since the millennium.

It is even more incredible that our country’s population has more than tripled since I was born 72 years ago.

The face of the country has also changed dramatically, for the good.

Just last week, I attended the 60th anniversary of my Grade 9 class at Bishop Ryan High School in Hamilton, Ont.

The gathering was attended by more than 50 former students, some of whom I had not seen in almost 60 years.

My classmates represented the Canada we knew when I was growing up. Multicultural, yes. Multi-racial no.

The returnees were all Caucasians, but speaking many languages as they hailed from eastern and western Europe.

The new Canada we know today was missing in action.

In the latter years of high school, we welcomed two brothers from China, but this is about as far as it went for racial diversity in my time.

Compare that to today when, on any given street in major metropolitan centres, there are citizens whose families come from every corner of the globe.

With all of the economic and political stresses facing the country, some are now questioning our willingness to welcome refugees and immigrants enjoying multiple religions, languages, and races.

United States President Donald Trump has used race as a successful wedge issue to promote MAGA as a watchword for progress.

That notion invokes turning the clock back to the way things were because it was so good.

But was it?

Speaking as a person born in the 1950s, it wasn’t all that great.

Girls were taught from a very early age that it was our job to support men, nurture children, and generally keep house and keep quiet.

Even our high school sports teams faced discrimination. My first organized strike was picketing the principal’s office to get court time for girls’ basketball practice.

The junior boys were already out of the playoffs, but we were still in contention. Nonetheless, the gym teacher who controlled court bookings refused to award female practice time in advance of crucial playoff games.

This may not seem like much, but it sent the message that girls’ sports were simply not as valuable as boys.

Our principal saw the light and made sure we got practice time, so progress was being made.

Girls were also expected to dress modestly and stay away from all forms of contact with boys until we were ready to get married. That, too, happened at a very young age.

Today’s Canada is a far more open and inviting place for girls than it ever was during my childhood.

Diversity means that we can be exposed to the world’s cultures without leaving our own communities.

According to multiple studies, immigrants are less likely to end up on social assistance, and more likely to create their own job than Canadian-born citizens.

They are not drains on the economy; they are actually contributing to the growth that makes this country an attractive destination for newcomers.

If the olden days were tough for women, imagine what it was like to be an Indigenous person.

I lived 30 kilometres from the largest Indigenous territory in Canada, Six Nations, and there wasn’t a single word about their story in any history book.

The modern move to reconciliation has only just started. But it does mean that Indigenous People are finally getting the recognition they deserve.

In the 1950s and 1960s, religious fights were rampant between Catholics and Protestants. I would get beaten up regularly on my way to school by Protestants who referred to us as “cat-lickers” while we shouted back at them that they were “proddy-dogs.”

In today’s world, those religious differences have been mostly buried, especially in Canada. Some new Canadians are clinging to religious battles that should have been left behind in their home countries. But that will take time.

But in this tense global environment, people around the world look to Canada as a country where people have learned to celebrate their differences, not revile them.

That modern embrace of Canadian cultural diversity is what makes our country great.

Canadians need to resist the temptation to blame all the country’s problems on new arrivals.

Instead, we should recognize that the country we are celebrating this week has learned how to incorporate religious, racial and linguistic differences into the common thread of a great country. We can be a model for the whole world.

Happy Canada Day!

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.