I don't get the "different viewpoint" argument...

"If I see a Black pilot, Im going to be like, boy, I hope hes qualified."

"Happening all the time in urban America, prowling Blacks go around for fun to go target white people, thats a fact. Its happening more and more."

"If Im dealing with somebody in customer service whos a moronic Black woman, I wonder is she there because of her excellence, or is she there because of affirmative action?"

"The American Democrat party hates this country. They wanna see it collapse. They love it when America becomes less white."

"The great replacement strategy, which is well under way every single day in our southern border, is a strategy to replace white rural America with something different."

Have you asked that person and shown them what those viewpoints actually were?

The media and conservatives are using this moment to sanewash and make the ideals Kirk spouted out be seen as normal and worthy of accepting instead of being offended and put off by and they are really going for it even after the killer was found they're still blaming the left, still touting this as him being silenced by angry leftists

It's not even "this moment" they've been doing it for awhile.

I had to unfriend someone because they compared Kirk to MLK.

Just because it's a different opinion doesn't mean it's something that should be accepted or tolerated.

We allow so-called moderates (the portion of them who genuinely aren't on board with hate) to be cowards who delude themselves about what the "both sides" actually are because they don't actually care about the issues, they just want to pat themselves on the back for being "unbiased" since they're not directly being targeted and they're too shortsighted to see how letting people stupid enough to be bigots control everything will hurt everyone.

I think that's the crux of it that should be asked of those people.

"Do you accept that Charlie Kirk held extremely bigoted views?"
No sugarcoating it, just be direct and see what those folks say.