Free speech is a principle for which good historical and philosophical reasons can given, regardless of party affiliation or political orientation. It’s not a hammer in one’s partisan toolbox one can selectively employ to advance one’s political goals.

(1) We have yet to establish how *exactly* the late Kirk *oppressed* this *specific* individual, as opposed to a category of people; (2) that wouldn’t entitle him to take justice in his own hands; and (3) certainly not in the name of his lover. I’ll add that in the texts, his lover seemed horrified.

Also the “romantic drama” behind the killing will always be of trivially less importance to normal people than the fact that (1) a man was killed, and (2) for apparently moral/political(?) reasons. As it so happens, the question “which side did it” partly helps inform our thinking about (2).

It is enough to note that his views are morally appalling and would fit with Nazi era policies. It does NOT logically follow from that one has warrant to call such a person a Nazi. Nazi label refers to a specific set of beliefs, world-view, and social membership. None of which have been established.

Liberalism is a religious doctrine, refined and altered over the centuries by heterodox theists.