FFFJ ALLIANCE
Related Articles
When tragedy strikes, the media loves to shape the story in a way that supports their own political goals. In the case of Charlie Kirk’s murderer, Tyler Robinson, we are watching this play out in real time. Headlines all across the internet frame him as “raised Mormon” or “a former member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.” They want readers to see a picture of a strict religious upbringing somehow producing a hateful, violent young man. But the truth is much simpler, and far less convenient for the press.
Tyler Robinson was not Mormon. He was an exmo — a term often used for people who leave the church and grow bitter against it. To continue calling him a Latter-day Saint is like calling a lapsed Catholic who renounced the Pope a “faithful Catholic.” It is dishonest, misleading, and deliberately hides the ideological currents that really shaped him. Robinson was not motivated by the teachings of the church. He had long since rejected them, embraced a radical secular worldview, and aligned himself with movements hostile to both Christianity and conservatism.
Why the “Exmo” Distinction Matters
The distinction between Mormon and ex-Mormon is not a trivial one. Membership in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is not about a label you wear for life. It is about living the standards of the gospel and remaining in good standing through adherence to commandments, repentance, and worthiness interviews.
Faithful members of the church hold a temple recommend — a card that certifies their worthiness to enter the House of the Lord. That recommend is only given to those who affirm that they are living a chaste life, that they sustain the prophets and apostles, and that they believe in the doctrines revealed by God. For Robinson, who openly lived in a same-sex relationship with a transgender partner, there is no question he would not have qualified.
To portray him as a “Mormon shooter” is to smear millions of faithful Saints who strive daily to live the gospel. The reality is that Robinson walked away from that faith and chose instead to stand against it.
LDS Teachings on Gender and Sexuality
The church has been very clear on where it stands. Marriage is ordained by God to be between a man and a woman. Gender is an eternal characteristic. And living in opposition to those truths places a person outside of church fellowship.
In fact, the General Handbook of Instructions — the manual that governs all official church practice — spells this out in detail. It states that a person who undergoes gender transition cannot be considered in full fellowship, cannot hold a temple recommend, and cannot be baptized without First Presidency approval. It also sets specific guidelines about participation in church activities, including restroom use, to avoid confusion and maintain order.
The church newsroom has published statements reiterating these policies, such as its 2015 clarification on same-sex marriage and subsequent updates. They emphasize that same-sex relationships and gender transition are incompatible with full fellowship in the church.
This is not about cruelty or exclusion. It is about revealed doctrine. To the church, gender is eternal, and sexuality is governed by God’s law of chastity. To deny those truths is to step outside of the covenant path.
Robinson and His Transgender Partner
Robinson’s partner, Lance Twiggs, identifies as transgender. The media uses this detail to paint a picture of Robinson as some kind of oppressed minority ally. What they will not say is that Twiggs himself would have no standing in the church.
Under current policy, Twiggs could not hold any priesthood office, could not serve in leadership, could not be baptized without high-level approval, and could not receive a temple recommend. Even bathroom use in church facilities would be regulated, as the Handbook makes clear.
That is not a policy targeting Twiggs specifically. It is the universal standard of the church. And it underscores the central point: Robinson was not Mormon. To the contrary, both he and his partner lived in open defiance of LDS teachings, outside the boundaries of what the church considers discipleship.
The Media Narrative and Its Agenda
So why does the media insist on labeling him Mormon? The answer is obvious. They want to taint the church itself, and by extension Christianity as a whole, with the stain of his actions. They want to create the impression that conservative religion breeds violence, when in fact Robinson’s life was defined by rebellion against that religion.
By calling him Mormon, they muddy the waters. They give cover to his leftist ideology, his hatred of Christianity, and his alignment with radical causes. They shield the reality that he was an exmo — and like so many exmos, he carried a deep bitterness against the church that raised him.
The exmo subculture online is infamous for this bitterness. Forums and social media spaces are filled with people who have left the church but cannot let it go. They devote enormous energy to mocking its leaders, tearing down its doctrines, and trying to drag others out with them. Robinson fits this mold perfectly. He was not shaped by the church. He was shaped by his rejection of it.
Exmo Rage and the Spirit of Antichrist
If you look closely at Robinson’s writings, his slogans, and his politics, what you see is not Mormonism but its opposite. He was openly hostile to conservative values, dismissive of Christian morality, and aligned with radical social causes that stand against revealed truth.
That is the spirit of Antichrist. It is the same pattern the Book of Mormon describes — people who once knew the truth, but turned from it and dedicated themselves to fighting against the church.
It is no coincidence that Robinson’s bitterness aligned with extreme liberalism. The radical left has always been hostile to faith, family, and tradition. For an exmo, embracing that worldview offers both an outlet for resentment and a community that validates their anger.
Why This Matters for Christians and Conservatives
For believers, the lessons here are urgent. Do not let the media’s framing deceive you. Robinson was not a product of Mormonism. He was a product of rejecting it. His choices, his lifestyle, and his ideology placed him squarely outside of the faith he abandoned.
For conservatives, this story shows once again how the press manipulates narratives to smear those who stand for truth. Instead of focusing on the shooter’s radical leftist politics, they focus on a childhood religious label he no longer lived by. Instead of acknowledging his exmo bitterness, they try to tie him to the faith he despised.
It is dishonest. It is manipulative. And it is dangerous, because it distorts the real ideological currents driving violence in our culture.
Fin
Charlie Kirk’s killer, Tyler Robinson, was not a Mormon. He was an exmo who had rejected the teachings of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, chosen a lifestyle incompatible with its doctrines, and embraced a radical liberal worldview that despises Christianity.
The media does not want you to see this. They want to smear the church and shift blame away from the cultural forces that truly shaped him. But the truth is clear: Robinson left the faith. He turned against it. And in the end, that hostility grew into something dark and violent.
As Christians and conservatives, we cannot allow the narrative to be twisted. We must speak the truth plainly: this was not a Mormon shooter. This was an exmo shooter, consumed by bitterness and radical ideology, whose choices led him far away from the gospel of Christ.
