I believe in free speech.

Because of that, I believed in Charlie Kirk. Not because I always agreed with him, but rather because he practiced free speech the way it should be practiced. He talked face to face with people. He would make his point. They would make their point. The exchange would go back and forth.

What infuriated many was that Kirk was much better at debate than most of those who squared off against him.

Kirk’s events were textbook examples of open debate, but you must watch the entire exchange to see that. If you watch just the cutouts that left- and right-wing influencers show, you’re not getting the whole picture.

The influencers are sharing snippets to enflame their audience because more clicks, comments and shares mean more money for the influencer.

Ironically, they use free speech but are among the poorest practitioners of it. They seek controversy, division and cash. Consensus hurts their bank account.

Kirk is gone. Other sane voices need to arise.

“This is a challenging time for so many in our country, but any divisions we face will never be solved by trying to hurt each other,” Colorado Gov. Jared Polis said. “I encourage everyone to be stronger and disagree better and peacefully.”

“American politics has sides. There is no use pretending it doesn’t,” New York Times columnist Ezra Klein said. “But both sides are meant to be on the same side of a larger project — we are all, or most of us, anyway, trying to maintain the viability of the American experiment.

“We were on the same side on the continued possibility of American politics. It is supposed to be an argument, not a war.”

A shooter in Utah disagreed. He made it a war. A suspect is in custody. Because he is innocent until proven guilty, I will not use his name.

The shooter, whether he is the suspect or someone else, had his mic drop moment. Engraved on a bullet casing was “Fascist: catch this.”

You’ve all seen the rise of the mic drop moment in our inability to have civil discourse.

Born in Hip Hop culture and popularized everywhere since, the mic drop is when someone says something and theatrically drops the microphone. The message is that what they just said is so profound, powerful and undeniable that no rebuttal is possible (or welcome). The discourse is over. I win and the rest of you have no business disagreeing.

Not only is the mic drop moronic, it’s also at odds with the very essence of free speech and civil discourse. Your speech needs to be protected. But more important is that speech with which you disagree must be protected.

Kirk always allowed the other side to speak and interact. He would disassemble their point if he disagreed. He didn’t use smug talking points and slogans. Nor did he use specious claims of hate speech and misinformation, which are too often defined as any speech that is in opposition of your currently held views.

The saying used to be “if you can’t beat them, join them.” A narrow-minded shooter in Utah changed that to “if you can’t beat them, kill them.”

A man was killed, but it was freedom of speech and civil discourse that was attacked.