Despite butting heads with Turning Point, this former Arizona GOP lawmaker praises Charlie Kirk

Conservative activist Charlie Kirk was memorialized yesterday at State Farm Stadium, eulogized by President Donald Trump, Vice President JD Vance and his grieving widow and new head of Turning Point USA, Erika Kirk.

“My husband Charlie, he wanted to save young men just like the one who took his life,” she told the crowd.

It was a moment of reflection — and Christian worship — amid a period of extreme division that his death has sparked.

Since Kirk was shot in Utah earlier this month, political rhetoric from all sides has ramped up.

President Donald Trump and his administration have vowed to investigate extreme leftist organizations they claim helped lead to his death. And attempts to crack down on social media posts, jokes and commentaries about Kirk have sparked a free speech reckoning we haven’t seen in this country in decades.

From late night host Jimmy Kimmel’s suspension to dozens of teachers and professors who have been fired to threats from Attorney General Pam Bondi to “crack down” on hate speech. It’s all sparking swift backlash — including from some on the right.

But Paul Boyer says Kirk was a fierce advocate of free speech.

Boyer is a former state lawmaker who penned an op-ed for the Arizona Republic arguing that Charlie Kirk was “the best of us.” This, despite the fact that Boyer was at odds with Kirk’s organization, Turning Point USA, after he refused to acquiesce to election denialism.

Still, he told The Show he sees Kirk’s legacy as more than about free speech — or anything in the political realm.

Charlie Kirk memorial in Glendale, Arizona

The memorial event honoring conservative activist Charlie Kirk was held at State Farm Stadium on Sept. 21, 2025. See KJZZ's coverage from Glendale.

Full conversation

PAUL BOYER: It’s more than a free speech thing. I mean, I think that Charlie ultimately cared about whoever was on the other end. I really think — and I’ve never met Charlie — but I think he really cared, that he wanted to persuade whoever it was of the truth, whether it was political things or even spiritual things.

LAUREN GILGER: So you mentioned spiritual there, and you talk about that a lot in this op-ed about his religious convictions as his almost most defining characteristic. You’re saying beyond the politics, beyond his activism, you think of him as a religious man.

BOYER: He was, 100%. And that was what was unique about Charlie, because anybody who’s in the public eye, typically, especially elected officials — I know he wasn’t elected, but he did have a political organization — they care about power. He didn’t. He cared about his relationship with Jesus, and he wanted to share Jesus with anybody who would listen.

GILGER: I want to ask you about Turning Point USA and that organization that he ran, because you were not always friendly with them, right? I want to know what you make of that, given the legacy of Charlie Kirk that you’re outlining there, because this is not an organization that you always agreed with.

BOYER: Yeah. I mean, they might have had a beef with me when I was an elected official, but honestly, it doesn’t matter. It doesn’t matter anymore. And honestly, I don’t know that it really mattered back then. I was getting critics left and right, you name it. And after a while you kind of just tend to tune it out.

But again, that’s neither here nor there. What matters most is, as I mentioned in the op-ed, is grace and redemption. And I really think that’s what ultimately Charlie cared about.

GILGER: I want to ask you about the circumstances in which this happened. It’s a political assassination, essentially, in this time in which politics are very, very heated. And this has definitely turned up the heat on the conversation, on the rhetoric, on I think the stakes for a lot of people in politics. What do you think this says about the state of politics in this country right now?

BOYER: That it’s gotten so bad that you can’t even share an opinion about what is true without risk of assassination. And that has to change. If we’re going to be a self-governing country. We are a republic, and that means that we have representatives who represent us at the federal level, but we elect them to represent us.

And if we don’t have virtue, for lack of a better term, if we don’t have excellence within ourselves, if we can’t govern ourselves, then I don’t know how long this country can last.

Amber Victoria Singer/KJZZ

GILGER: So you see this as a moment in which democracy is threatened?

BOYER: People use the term democratic republic. We’re a constitutional republic. And what that really means is, we do. We set the the system up for ourselves as citizens, and we govern ourselves. And I do think that is at risk if we can’t fix this, if we can’t make it better where we can just talk to each other.

GILGER: Let me ask you about talking to each other because this is an interesting moment for free speech. We’re seeing a lot of talk about that, a lot of debate about what it means right now in this country. Charlie Kirk was, as you said, a big advocate for free speech. His willingness to debate was, I think, really defining of his style of politics.

He was shot in the middle of a debate-style part of his comeback tour, where he was saying, “Debate me. Come up here and tell me I’m wrong. Prove me wrong.” What do you think Kirk would think of what’s happening in this country in terms of free speech in the wake of his shooting?

We’ve seen a lot of people fired for what they’ve said about him, including the suspension of late night host Jimmy Kimmel. We’re seeing the president say maybe other broadcast networks should lose their licenses, a lot of people saying this is an assault on free speech.

BOYER: He was clearly a fierce free speech advocate. Now, I never want to say what someone who is no longer with us, what they might have said. But just given his public comments, I don’t believe — and this is just my opinion — that he would want Jimmy Kimmel, for example, fired for just what he said.

Now, I do think that Disney made a business decision, but I think Charlie would say, “Yeah, he should have the right to say whatever boneheaded thing that he wants to say and not have to worry about losing his job as a result.”

GILGER: I wonder, we talked about political violence. You left politics and you were a politician who was willing to sometimes buck his party to the detriment of your own political career. What do you think about, I guess, the future of politics? Like, would you ever consider running for office again in light of the kind of landscape we’re in right now?

BOYER: I mean, I never say never. I don’t have any concrete plans right now to run for office, but I could see myself running in the future, regardless of the dynamics, because I believe if God wants me there, I’ll be there.

GILGER: Do you think that fewer people will be willing to put themselves in that situation? If you know they’re worried that they will put themselves in danger, or their film is in danger by doing it?

BOYER: I think more so not running for office, but certain votes. I think that elected officials will be a lot more judicious with upsetting either the base or take a vote that might lead to political violence.

GILGER: Which you did. You were willing to buck the party and go against the pressure from the party to say that the election was stolen. You never would do that.

BOYER: Yeah, absolutely. I mean, because in good conscience, I couldn’t vote for that, come what may. And I’ve always believed that God will take care of me. And if that means paying the ultimate sacrifice, I mean, I could get hit by a bus tomorrow.

Now that being said, as an elected official and someone who has a young son at home, I don’t want my son to grow up without his father and my wife to live without her husband. Based on a vote that I took and having to live with that, that would be devastating. And I can’t even imagine what his wife and two kids are going to have to deal with over the next few decades.

GILGER: So I wonder, Paul, where do you think we go from here? The country feels broken in a lot of ways. I think the reality is violent in a lot of ways. In what way do you hope that this is a defining moment? What do you think that could mean?

BOYER: Yeah. So do you want the true answer or the political one?

GILGER: Both.

BOYER: OK, well, let me give you the real answer. This country needs Jesus. We do. Let me explain. True Christianity is really radical. I mean, praying for those who persecute you, turning the other cheek — in reality, that is the hardest thing to do.

The hardest 10 words to say in the English language are 10 words: “I’m sorry. I was wrong. Will you please forgive me?” I really think we need more of that. And I think the only way we get that is as men and women who have given their lives to God and say, “You know what? That is more important than whatever political win that I can ever get.”

GILGER: What’s the political answer?

BOYER: Oh, I don’t know. I mean, you hear it all the time. All the pundits say, “Oh, we need to dial down the rhetoric, and we need to stop saying, you know, words are violence.” Which is true, but ultimately it doesn’t get to the root of the problem.