Politics in the 2020s has always been a mess, but few things captured the sheer chaos of the digital age like the recent spat between the "King of Horror" and one of the internet’s most polarizing conservative pundits. If you’ve been wondering what Stephen King said about Charlie Kirk, it wasn't just a casual jab. It was a serious accusation that sparked a firestorm of fact-checking, an assassination-linked controversy, and a rare, very public apology from the man who wrote The Shining.
Honestly, it's a weird story. It involves a Bible-verse-quoting YouTuber, a tragic shooting in Utah, and a deleted tweet that almost broke a corner of the internet.
The Tweet That Started the Firestorm
It all went down in September 2025, right after the shocking news broke that Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk had been fatally shot at Utah Valley University. The atmosphere on social media was already toxic. People were arguing over Kirk’s legacy before the news cycle had even finished its first lap.
Enter Stephen King.
King, who is basically as famous for his prolific tweeting as he is for his novels these days, jumped into a thread started by Fox News host Jesse Watters. Watters had posted that Kirk wasn't "controversial" or "polarizing" but was actually a patriot. King wasn't having it.
He fired back with: “He advocated stoning gays to death. Just sayin’.”
📖 Related: Benjamin Kearse Jr Birthday: What Most People Get Wrong
The post went viral instantly. We’re talking over 13 million views in a matter of hours. But almost as fast as it spread, the backlash hit. Conservative figures and even some of King's own fans pointed out that the quote seemed... off.
Did Charlie Kirk Actually Say That?
This is where things get kind of complicated. To understand what Stephen King said about Charlie Kirk, you have to look at the 2024 video King was likely thinking of.
Kirk had been in a digital spat with a YouTuber named Ms. Rachel—the woman who basically raises everyone's toddlers through their iPad screens. Ms. Rachel had quoted the "love thy neighbor" verse to defend Pride Month. Kirk, never one to back down from a culture war, responded by telling her she should "crack open that Bible" and pointed to Leviticus.
He basically said that while she likes the "love" parts, there are "lesser referenced" parts in Leviticus 18 and 20 about men laying with men being "stoned to death." He ended his video with the same phrase King used: "Just sayin'."
So, did he advocate for it?
👉 See also: Are Sugar Bear and Jennifer Still Married: What Really Happened
Technically, Kirk was arguing that if you’re going to quote the Bible as a moral authority for "love," you have to reckon with the more violent laws in the same book. His supporters argued he was making a theological point about "cherry-picking" scripture. His critics, including King at first, saw it as a thinly veiled endorsement of the sentiment.
The Mea Culpa: King Admits He Was Wrong
It didn't take long for the pressure to mount. Even for a guy who has spent years battling trolls on X (formerly Twitter), this was different. Senator Ted Cruz called King a “horrible, evil, twisted liar.”
King actually did something you rarely see on social media: he apologized.
He deleted the original post and wrote: "I apologize for saying Charlie Kirk advocated stoning gays. What he actually demonstrated was how some people cherry-pick Biblical passages."
He didn't stop there. He followed up by admitting he had failed his own standards for accuracy. "This is what I get for reading something on Twitter w/o fact-checking. Won't happen again," he quipped. He even lean-quoted Cruz's insult back at himself, saying, "The horrible, evil, twisted liar apologizes."
✨ Don't miss: Amy Slaton Now and Then: Why the TLC Star is Finally "Growing Up"
Why This Moment Actually Matters
Look, people get things wrong on the internet every second. But when it's Stephen King talking about a man who had just been assassinated, the stakes are different.
The shooter, identified as 22-year-old Tyler Robinson, had allegedly told family members that Kirk was "full of hate" before the attack. In that context, King’s false attribution of a "stoning" quote felt like gas on a fire. It highlighted the dangerous loop of digital misinformation:
- The Misquote: A complex or "edgy" theological argument gets distilled into a headline-ready accusation.
- The Viral Spread: The accusation reaches millions before anyone checks the original footage.
- The Retraction: The apology rarely reaches the same number of people as the original lie.
King eventually compared Kirk’s killer to the cowards who shot JFK and Martin Luther King Jr., trying to bridge the gap and condemn the violence, but the "stoning" claim remains the thing most people remember from that week.
Actionable Takeaways for the Digital Age
If there is anything to learn from the saga of what Stephen King said about Charlie Kirk, it's that even the most brilliant minds can get played by a 280-character limit.
- Check the "Just Sayin'" context: Whenever you see a quote that sounds too extreme to be true, it’s usually because the context has been stripped away. Kirk was quoting Leviticus to prove a point about Ms. Rachel's theology, not necessarily writing a policy proposal for 21st-century law.
- Wait for the 24-hour mark: King’s biggest mistake was his timing. Posting a debunked claim hours after someone's death is a recipe for a PR disaster.
- Admit it when you're wrong: For all the flak King took, his willingness to say "I was wrong" is actually a masterclass in how to handle a mistake. He didn't double down; he cleaned it up.
You might want to go back and watch the original Kirk vs. Ms. Rachel exchange yourself. It’s a fascinating look at how two people can read the same book and come away with completely different worldviews. Just be careful what you post afterward—unless you’re prepared to deal with the kind of heat only a horror novelist can handle.
If you are following the aftermath of Kirk's death, you should look into the latest updates on the Tyler Robinson trial in Utah, as the case is expected to bring more of these social media influences into the courtroom.