However, so as not to speak (purely) ill of the dead, I will say that he was an accomplished martial artist with a prolific film career.
In 1961, in his early 20s. You get ~80 years on this planet to make mistakes and have views that some other people will dislike. If these are the worst things we can accuse him of, while acknowledging all his charitable work, I'd say he fared OK compared to many other role models we have.
https://www.thepinknews.com/2021/01/13/chuck-norris-homophob...
Turns out he was a MAGA Christian homophobe. That’s … disappointing. But I guess I was naive to expect something different.
Hating on LGBT folks and trying to restrict their rights is one of those things that is wrong no matter how you dice it. People who believe otherwise are wrong, full stop.
So it's not really so much about people thinking someone else's views are awful. It's about whether or not those views truly are awful. And I feel very safe in saying that if someone thinks my support of LGBT folks is pretty awful, they're in the wrong, not me. And I'm in the right to think their hateful views are awful.
(Yes, I realize how arrogant that sounds, but I have to stand by it.)
I think this is something that transcends politics or culture wars or anything like that. Having these sorts of hateful views are actively harmful to humanity's and society's future. That doesn't mean I think we should censor people (rampant censorship is also actively harmful to our future), but it does mean we need to somehow fix people and shift the culture toward one that lets people live how they want in cases like this where doing so doesn't actually hurt anyone else. I have no idea how to accomplish this, though.
Just because they hate me, though, doesn't mean I can't disagree with their position.
If every racist, homophobe, and transphobe (and others) would stop trying to enshrine their views into law, I'd have much less of a problem with them. I wouldn't want to hang out with them, but I could safely ignore and not care one bit about their views.
We know the answers to these questions for Norris.
He was an Obama birther conspiracist.
He thought gays shouldn't be allowed to join Boy Scouts.
He was a big supporter of Netanyahu.
This aren't things that are even remotely in the same ballpark as disagreement. If someone is using their celebrity status to cause harm to millions or tens of millions, I think we can say a few unkind words about them when they go.
How about "Don't be a bad person when you're alive"?
I struggle with that rule sometimes.
Is there one way to be a good person?
Does being a good person also mean agreeing with your politics?
Can we stop framing human rights as "politics"? People hating on others because they don't like that they're gay or trans or black or brown... that's just people being fundamentally awful people, and has nothing to do with politics.
The fact that they are then taking their awfulness and engaging politically to enshrine their awful views into law just adds another dimension to it.
I said this in another comment: if these people with awful views would stop trying to make those awful views laws, then I'd have much less of a problem with them; I could at least just ignore them.
> Is there one way to be a good person?
What a useless, one-dimensional take on the problem.
My dad had some antiquated views himself too. People can have/be both, I suppose.
But then you can start actively using your celebrity status to advocate for legally restricting the rights of people you don't like. That's the real problem, and that's why I wouldn't want to look at people like Chuck Norris as role models.
Being polite doesn't make you a good person. It just makes you tolerable, or even pleasant, in personal interactions.
Sure, we can talk about things like your dad's experience. But there's more to it than that.
I looked this one up. It's true. He's been going out of his way to be a political firebrand and claiming milquetoast Democrats are Satan for decades. It wasn't some offhand comment when cornered on stage. He's pushed white christian nationalism hard for quite some time.
Sad, because it was so unnecessary, divisive, and crazy--a black mark on his legacy.