On Intent, Impact, and "Political Correctness"

Hey friends. Check my math on something:

This article recently made the rounds: “Large Majorities Strongly Dislike PC Culture”

Most members of the “exhausted majority,” and then some, dislike political correctness. Among the general population, a full 80 percent believe that “political correctness is a problem in our country.” 

And this attitude transcends race, age, and geography. As a 40-year-old American Indian in Oklahoma put it: 

“It seems like everyday you wake up something has changed … Do you say Jew? Or Jewish? Is it a black guy? African-American? … You are on your toes because you never know what to say. So political correctness in that sense is scary.” 

In the extended interviews and focus groups, participants made clear that they were concerned about their day-to-day ability to express themselves: They worry that a lack of familiarity with a topic, or an unthinking word choice, could lead to serious social sanctions for them.

_80691582_89281465.jpg

I have long said that what some people call “PC” really sounds to me like basic kindness. When people share how they self-identify, or how they want to be addressed, it seems like a no-brainer to honor that. It costs me nothing to do so, and it matters. That is basic Golden Rule stuff. 

But I also empathize with those who find it hard to keep up with changes in culture, and who worry about giving offense without meaning to. A new friend of mine is gender non-binary and goes by the pronoun “they.” Despite wanting to honor this person’s identity, I have slipped up many times. I’m also realizing how often I use the word “guys” to describe a generic group of people. It doesn’t bother me to hear the term, but people I care about bump on it. It costs me very little to be more inclusive with my language. I’m grateful for the grace of others to both point out when I fall short, and to understand that I’m trying and will screw up along the way. We could all be kinder to one another.

Even as I seek to do my best to honor others, people of color who are friends and colleagues have helped me see that impact matters more than intent. People can mean well—can intend to act in a positive way—but the effects of their actions are what matter most. I get that. As a woman, I can think of times when a man has tried to stick up for me in a way that goes beyond being an ally and tips over into paternalism. They meant to help, but their actions had the effect of portraying me as helpless and needing a man to rescue me. Impact over intent. 

But I also think that, in Maya Angelou’s words, when you know better, you do better. What if one genuinely doesn’t know better? What the survey about PC suggests is that many people want to do the right thing, they just don’t know what it is. I have long loved Thomas Merton’s prayer/poem that begins, “My Lord God, I have no idea where I am going.” He writes, “the fact that I think I am following your will does not mean that I am actually doing so. But I believe that the desire to please you does in fact please you.” We are flawed, limited, imperfect human beings, often fumbling to do the right thing. I can’t dismiss the power of intent. 

I’ve long wondered, then, is there a way to deepen our cultural conversation beyond impact and intent?

I recently attended a conference for coaches, where I attended a workshop on building trust in teams. The presenter offered four aspects of team trust, gleaned from the book The Thin Book of Trust:

  1. Sincerity: do you mean what you say?

  2. Reliability: do you honor commitments?

  3. Care: do you hold others’ interests in mind?

  4. Competence: do you have the ability to do what’s asked of you?

A lightbulb went off as I considered whether these four traits might help us bust through the impasse I see over what many call “PC culture.” If someone has shown themselves to be generally sincere, reliable, and caring, I will be less inclined to take instant offense when they do something that has a harmful impact. That’s not excusing their behavior, that’s viewing it in a larger context. 

A person is sincere when they say, “I’m really trying here,” and you know that they truly are.
A person is reliable when they set a course of action and you see them follow through on it. 
Care is demonstrated in any number of ways, but an overall relationship of care can be a container to hold the many missteps and screwups we make because we’re human.

As for for the fourth quality, competence, well, some folks are willfully ignorant, and don’t care to learn about the world around them and how it’s changing. But others simply don’t know what they don’t know. The goal, then, is to help one another develop cultural competence, in ways that flow from our own sincerity, reliability, and care. (It’s also why social media can be so detrimental to dialogue about these things. How do I know how sincere, reliable, caring, and competent random person on the internet is? Instead we blast first, ask questions later.) 

What do you think?

What's the Difference Between Family Time and Sabbath?

The seven year old, reading the holy texts on a recent Sabbath... Three years after the publication of Sabbath in the Suburbs, I continue to speak to groups about our family's experience of taking a day each week for rest and play... which looks very different now than it did during the year-long experiment, but that's another post.

People who've read the book will notice that we didn't spend the day doing "holy" activities. We didn't read scripture together or pray (except before meals) or even talk about God all that much. We often lit a candle to designate that this time was somehow set apart, but otherwise, there was nothing particularly religious in our observance. So what gives?

Or as many people ask me, "We already have family time together; what makes Sabbath different?"

First, I don't believe in creating a division between so-called secular and sacred activities. In my tradition, we believe and profess that God is the Lord of our whole lives. Yes, there are times that we intentionally focus on our spiritual lives, through study or prayer or small groups or a worship service. But all of life is (or can be) an act of devotion to God as we understand God.

That said, I believe the language we use matters--in fact, what we name something changes the nature of the thing we're naming. It's great to have family time, and there's nothing wrong with calling it that. But invoking the word Sabbath acknowledges that God is also present, and that the things we do during this time can nurture our spiritual lives as well as our sense of family connectedness. It gives us a different vision and perspective on that time.

The other day I was listening to Krista Tippett's On Being interview of social scientist Ellen Langer, and they were talking about this exact phenomenon. In one study, subjects were asked to evaluate a series of jokes and cartoons. For half the group, the researchers framed the activity as work; the other half, play. Those who were told to play reported a much greater enjoyment than those who were "working" at the very same activity.

Similarly, Langer referenced a study of chambermaids--women who are on their feet all day doing constant physical labor. This group experienced actual physiological changes when they named their daily activity "exercise" rather than simply "work." Fascinating!

So here's an easy experiment for those of you who want to connect with this old, ancient practice that has such resonance for Jewish and Christian communities but don't know where to start. Put the label of Sabbath on something you already do: family time, your daily ritual of tea and Sudoku, even your workout at the gym. See what changes, what feels different. See if the activity resonates on a different level. And report back!

~

By the way, the entire interview with Ellen Langer was fascinating. Did you know mindfulness is possible without a meditation practice?

Good Morning, #Baltimore

Screen Shot 2015-04-28 at 1.00.03 PM My middle child sings this little bit from Hairspray every time we go to Charm City---our most recent visit was just three days ago. Our family knows Baltimore primarily as tourists and day-trippers, and I've visited there in a professional capacity many times. So while it's not our city, and there's a lot of it we've never seen, we have a lot of affection for it.

I don't make a habit of commenting on current events as they're unfolding. I always feel other people say things so much better than I could. But my next planned post was going to be a muffin recipe, and... no. Just no.

Hugh Hollowell wisely advised well-intentioned people (especially white people) who don't know what to say to amplify the words of others, especially people of color. So I'm going to amplify the words of Derrick Weston, whose post deserves to be read widely---and judging from Facebook shares, it is:

Violence is what happens when grief has nowhere else to go and black Baltimore is tired of grieving its young men. That is not a justification for violence. At my core, I believe that violence is the ultimate dehumanizing act and yet when individuals and communities have been on the receiving ends of all sorts of violence – physical violence, economic violence, racial violence, psychological violence – those individuals and communities assert their own humanity by declaring they will no longer be trampled. That is what you are seeing in the streets of Baltimore tonight.

I hear his anger and weariness, but also his wisdom in trying to see the big picture. (Read it all.) I often want to ask him what I want to ask LGBT friends who respond graciously to people who hurl the most hateful language at them:

Do you ever get weary of being the bigger person? 

And yet, they are embodying the change they wish to see. I'm thankful for that.

Anyway. If you only have time for one post, stop reading mine immediately and read Derrick's.

But if you have time for the disjointed thoughts of a white woman 75 minutes south of Baltimore, here goes.

I'm thinking a lot about language. I'm remembering Hurricane Katrina, when a photo of black individuals taking things from an abandoned store was captioned with the word "looting" and a similar photo of white people doing the same thing was captioned "taking." I'm thinking of the many examples of wanton destruction that take place when one sports team beats another one that get framed in completely different ways than what happened in Baltimore yesterday. (See Black People Riot Over Injustice; White People Riot Over Pumpkins and Football.)

I'm thinking about use of the word "thugs." Robert told me some stories just the other day about the most disgusting sexism at the highest levels of Silicon Valley. When women would complain, HR would respond "He's the CEO, he can do what he wants."  Thanks in part to the culture these executives created, the number of women in high tech is lower than it was just a few years ago. These men operate without any regard for decency, or in many cases the rule of law.

They are thugs.

When we use that term for some people and not for others, it says something about us.

In college at Rice there was a sociology professor, Chad Gordon (may he rest in peace), who taught a popular series of classes that got nicknamed "_________ with Chad." My husband took TV with Chad, for example. There was also Death with Chad. (Of course the most popular was Sex with Chad.)

He also taught a class on the psychology and sociology of group dynamics, nicknamed Crowds with Chad. I wish I'd taken that class. Perhaps it would help me understand the dynamics of this situation. Protests have gone on for days and have been overwhelmingly peaceful, with police seeking to contain the crowd rather than subdue it. And yet even that peaceful atmosphere could not neutralize a smaller group of primarily young people intent on violence yesterday.

A Crowds with Chad class might help me understand the crowds on the Internet, where people feel free to call people "animals" and say "run 'em over." It's a mob mentality out there. I've seen it said so many times since #BlackLivesMatter began that if people would just follow police instructions, they'd still be alive today. Since when is resisting arrest or running away from police a capital crime?

A Facebook friend, a Presbyterian church elder in Tennessee, posted the following on Facebook:

#FreddieGray matters.

America, your double standards are showing. This land was looted & its inhabitants murdered or displaced. We have consistently used lethal force to achieve political ends from the onset. Violence is & has been the American way. I am all about the #Peace, but if the youth of Baltimore stop rioting & practice nonviolence as self-defense instead of looting, they would be way more ethical & revolutionary than every role model they have in this messed-up world.

He took it down within hours because the vitriol got completely out of hand. I happen to agree with the sentiment, but even if I didn't---how does bullying someone into silence on Facebook help anything?

I've also been thinking a lot about the two-part series This American Life produced called Cops See It Differently. Please listen to it. It's an important two hours of audio. It will open your eyes to the many good law-enforcement officers who take their duty seriously to protect and to serve, and the difficult position so many of them are in. (Guess what? Pretty much everybody would rather be taken to the hospital than to jail. Wouldn't you? Unfortunately that means it's very difficult to discern which detainees truly "can't breathe.")

The show may also leave you feeling very, very discouraged. It did me. The bridge we still need to cross in order to reach one another, or even just understand one another, is just so long... and riddled with bodies, both physical and metaphorical.

By the way, many people have claimed that the police problem is a matter of a "few bad apples." I hope they are extending the same courtesy of nuance to protesters in Baltimore, most of whom were peaceful, and many of whom are taking the day off to clean up the mess someone else made. They do this because they love their city and want to do their part.

How are we, how am I, being the change we wish to see?

My Friends Make Stuff: New Books by Rachel Hackenberg and Bob Harris

Two new books for your consideration today! SacredPause-209x300Sacred Pause: A Creative Retreat for the Word-Weary Christian by Rachel Hackenberg is one of those books that makes you breathe more deeply just flipping the pages. I perused it in the dentist’s waiting room recently, and was so immersed that I forgot the sounds of suction and dentist’s drill wafting through the open door. No minor feat.

The book, with sections like “The Verb Became Flesh” and “In the Shadow of Wingdings,” is an invitation to explore the language of our faith in fresh and inviting ways, through impromptu poems, images and even doodles. I liked the section in which she likens Jesus’ words “my yoke is easy” with those elastic strings that tie her kids’ shoes together in the Target shoe section. Lovely! So much of the language of scripture relies on metaphors that aren’t immediately accessible to a non-agrarian, technological society. How can these words come alive again?

In the Presbyterian Church (USA), we have a prayer in our book of worship that we pray before reading scripture. It says in part, “O God, amid all the changing words of our generation, speak your eternal word that does not change.” Over the years I’ve grown dissatisfied with this prayer. Our lives our changing all of the time. Our God is improvisational, I believe. So I’ve added a phrase: “speak your eternal word that does not change and yet is ever new.” Hackenberg’s book helps us hold those two ideas in creative tension. Check it out here.

~

81x1FbpNupLEntering Wonderland: A Toolkit for Pastors New to a Church is a new book by Robert A. (Bob) Harris, a friend and colleague in this presbytery. Since retiring from parish ministry, Bob has been working as a coach, helping pastors set good goals and move forward in ministry.

As the name implies, the book is aimed at pastors who have recently arrived in a congregation. It features an approach to getting to know the leaders and many in the congregation, assessing them as spiritual leaders, learning where the minefields are, clarifying expectations, and a host of other things. Bob served as my coach when I first arrived at Tiny Church and I’m thankful for his guidance in helping my ministry get off to a good start there.

But the book is not just for pastors new to a church; the book has a wealth of resources and ideas that can help pastors and church leaders.

Entering Wonderland is published by Rowman and Littlefield, who took over Alban Institute's publishing arm. Check it out.

What are you reading these days?

No time for books? Here are my most popular posts.

Jesus the Snarky?

jesus_laughing21I'm preaching for a bunch of preachers in two weeks, at an event called the Festival of Homiletics, or as many of us affectionately call  it: Homies. In preparation, I've been thinking a lot about the text below from Matthew. I'd love to know what you hear in it, especially as it speaks to our current context. Jesus' words about "what comes out of the mouth" speak to me about cheap talk, the proliferation of words in a world of cable news and Twitter, and yes, the rise of snarkiness.

And then what's going on with Jesus' reaction to the Canaanite woman in the second section? It's not every day you hear a word from the Lord that makes you want to say "Ooh, burn!" (Yes I'm a child of the 80s.)

What is up with Jesus' reaction? How do you hear this story?

I'm especially interested in thoughts from you non-churchy types.

Matthew 15

10 Then he called the crowd to him and said to them, ‘Listen and understand: 11it is not what goes into the mouth that defiles a person, but it is what comes out of the mouth that defiles.’ 12Then the disciples approached and said to him, ‘Do you know that the Pharisees took offence when they heard what you said?’ 13He answered, ‘Every plant that my heavenly Father has not planted will be uprooted. 14Let them alone; they are blind guides of the blind.* And if one blind person guides another, both will fall into a pit.’ 15But Peter said to him, ‘Explain this parable to us.’ 16Then he said, ‘Are you also still without understanding?17Do you not see that whatever goes into the mouth enters the stomach, and goes out into the sewer? 18But what comes out of the mouth proceeds from the heart, and this is what defiles. 19For out of the heart come evil intentions, murder, adultery, fornication, theft, false witness, slander. 20These are what defile a person, but to eat with unwashed hands does not defile.’

21 Jesus left that place and went away to the district of Tyre and Sidon.22Just then a Canaanite woman from that region came out and started shouting, ‘Have mercy on me, Lord, Son of David; my daughter is tormented by a demon.’ 23But he did not answer her at all. And his disciples came and urged him, saying, ‘Send her away, for she keeps shouting after us.’ 24He answered, ‘I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.’ 25But she came and knelt before him, saying, ‘Lord, help me.’ 26He answered, ‘It is not fair to take the children’s food and throw it to the dogs.’ 27She said, ‘Yes, Lord, yet even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their masters’ table.’ 28Then Jesus answered her, ‘Woman, great is your faith! Let it be done for you as you wish.’ And her daughter was healed instantly.

Words Matter

One of my favorite of the Sabbath Supplemental videos is this, our version of a fast-draw video: https://vimeo.com/74475982

What does the word "busy" stir up in you?

This was a discussion on Facebook recently. As the video indicates, I know a lot of people who use it as a means of besting one another and asserting their importance. Others pushed back and said, "Eh, not always." Sometimes people are just... busy. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

I've tried to stop using the word. It's become the "I'm fine" in verbal communication. Maybe it greases the conversational wheels, but it's boring and content-free.

Another phrase snuck up on me this weekend. Someone asked me to do something and I said I couldn't because I was "tied up." Now there's an evocative expression!

Sometimes, of course, our days are not our own---our schedules are at the mercy of family needs, work expectations, and the like. In that sense, the term "tied up" makes sense... though it sets other people up as our adversaries, which maybe isn't healthy.

But in my case, I was engaging in activities I'd freely chosen. And I used the term to try and cover the fact that I was choosing not to drop everything and go help the person. "Tied up" meant "I would help you, but dangit, there's this other thing holding me captive!"

Pastors and folks in other helping professions are counseled to schedule time to recharge, and to protect that time. If people want to meet with you then, simply say you have a commitment---they don't need to know that it's for the massage therapist or to sneak off to an afternoon Nats game because you've had three funerals in the last two weeks. I agree with this in principle. Especially if it's a pastoral need: there's something callous about saying to a grieving family, "I can meet with you tomorrow but not today---mani/pedi time!"

At the same time, the more we keep self-care to ourselves, the more we give the impression that we don't need such activities, and those who do are somehow weaker or less dedicated.

Yes, there are times that my life is not my own. That comes with the territory of loving your neighbor. I wouldn't have it any other way. But I'm not sure I'm on board with "tied up." I'd rather take responsibility for my own self-care, and strive for transparency with how I use my time.

What do you think?

~

Reminder: You have until 10 p.m. Eastern to enter the Sabbath in the Suburbs giveaway!

Friday Link Love: Flying Houses, Being a Mystic, and Mighty Girls... One of Whom with Toilet Covers on Her Head

First, if you haven't already heard me shouting from the rooftops about it, here is my interview about Sabbath in the Suburbs on Huffington Post Books. Another note. I share links to interesting, inspiring, curious content all week long at my Facebook page. Feel free to subscribe to the public updates, even if we're not FB friends!

Lots of images in Link Love this week, and a few meaty quotes. Onward...

~

Flying Houses by Laurent Cherere -- Colossal

Wonderful. Like something out of Roald Dahl:

laurent-2

laurent-4

~

Top Read-Aloud Books Starring Mighty Girls -- A Mighty Girl

This is one I shared on Facebook. Great list! I want to read them all.

~

Christian Wiman on Faith and Language -- Andrew Sullivan

Another one I shared earlier this week, but dang, I like it:

To have faith in a religion, any religion, is to accept at some primary level that its particular language of words and symbols says something true about reality. This doesn't mean that the words and symbols are reality (that's fundamentalism), nor that you will ever master those words and symbols well enough to regard reality as some fixed thing. What it does mean, though, is that you can 'no more be religious in general than [you] can speak language in general' (George Lindbeck), and that the only way to deepen your knowledge and experience of ultimate divinity is to deepen your knowledge and experience of the all-too-temporal symbols and language of a particular religion. Lindbeck would go so far as to say that your religion of origin has such a bone-deep hold on you that, as with a native language, it's your only hope for true religious fluency. I wouldn't go that far, but I would say that one has to submit to symbols and language that may be inadequate in order to have those inadequacies transcended.

This is true of poetry, too: I don't think you can spend your whole life questioning whether language can represent reality. At some point, you have to believe that the inadequacies of words you use will be transcended by the faith with which you use them. You have to believe that poetry has some reach into reality itself, or you have to go silent. - Christian Wiman, "Notes on Poetry and Religion," from Ambition and Survival: Becoming a Poet.

~

Stoic, Addict, Mystic -- Andrew Sullivan

Another one posted on The Dish this week:

We are rarely presented with an authentically fulfilling trajectory for our desires... If we are created for infinite satisfaction, we really only have three choices about what to do with our desire in this life: We will become either a stoic, an addict, or a mystic. The stoic squelches desire out of fear, while the addict attempts to satisfy his desire for infinity with finite things, which, of course, can’t satisfy. That’s why the addict wants more and more and more. The mystic, on the other hand — in the Christian sense of the term — is the one who is learning how to direct his desire for infinity toward infinity," - Christopher West, whose new book is Fill These Hearts.

For infinity, toward infinity. Nice.

Winners of the 2012 National Geographic Photo Contest -- National Geographic

A cat picture won! Sort of. Go to the link to see the grand prize winner, as well as all the other top picks. My favorite in the "people" category:

H6yMi6fUB_1JR964xxG8RxsYArlNNn1lR5PWutchIb-0b1wahCLwPmHficO2saD0RkzVCatVnWrRPg

~

Unleash Your Unconscious: How Switching Tasks Maximizes Creative Thinking -- 99U

Incubation breaks boosted creative performance, but only when the time was spent engaged in a different kind of mental activity. Participants who in the break switched from verbal to spatial, or from spatial to verbal, excelled when they returned to their main task – in terms of the number and quality of their solutions. The change in focus freed up their unconscious to spend the incubation period tackling the main challenge.

Highly recommend running, for people with the knees for it.

~

Embracing Mystery in the New Year: Ten Essential Practices -- Christian Valters Paintner

Follow the thread. Each of us has a unique unfolding story and call in this world. We don't "figure this out" but rather we allow the story to emerge in its own time, tending the symbols and synchronicities that guide us along. Trust in what you love. Following the thread is essentially about cultivating a deep trust in what you love. What are the things that make your heart beat loudly, no matter how at odds they feel with your current life (and perhaps especially so)? Make some room this year to honor what brings you alive.

~

Airplane Lavatory Self-Portraits -- Sad and Useless

h/t Keith Snyder.

Nina Katchadourian whiles away long plane journeys by locking herself in the lavatory and pretending to be a 15th century Dutch painting. The project began spontaneously on a flight in March 2010 and is ongoing…

I do think about the line forming outside the door while she's doing this, but:

lav3

~

Have a wonderful weekend!

Friday Link Love

A few odds and ends from around the Intertubes: 7 Principles of Comedy/ Design/ Creating Anything

Discussion of the HBO special "Talking Funny" with Ricky Gervais, Jerry Seinfeld, Chris Rock and Louis CK. Interesting connections between their process and other creative processes. Plus there's a link to the special, available in four parts on YouTube.

The Myth of Self Control

From Andrew Sullivan's blog. "Dan Ariely sees the psychology of self control at work in the tale of Ulysses and the sirens."

Mom Gets the Right Things Done with the Natural Planning Model

I first read this as "natural family planning," for which the jokes write themselves. But this is a Getting Things Done post about how to apply the principles of GTD to one's home/family life, not just work life. The more I get into GTD the more I realize it is really a process of discernment at its core.

Beware the Metaphor

We've always known language is powerful, now we have a study that demonstrates one aspect of this:

Researchers asked students to read one of two crime reports. In the first report, crime was described as a "wild beast preying on the city" and "lurking in neighborhoods."

Guess which group suggested more jails and getting "tougher on crime," and which suggested more social reforms such as improving education?

This study is not surprising, but it does solidify my intense dislike for cable news and its swooshes and logos and Super Scary Music.

Fidelia's Sisters: How Do You Do It?

A nice column from a minister-mom that provides an honest look at what it's really like to engage on those two vocations.

A Benedictine Paradigm for Congregational Life

In all our talk about being missional and the church not existing for its own sake, we can get out of whack as we fail to nurture our own spiritual lives. The Benedictine Rule can show us how to find balance and faithfulness between inward journey and outward service.

One More on Tucson

I said my piece, more or less, at the end of Sunday's sermon, but I'm continuing to read and reflect. I agree with Jon Stewart, that the stories of the victims and those who stepped in to provide aid are truly inspiring. Whether it's the congressional intern, just days on the job, who cradled Rep. Giffords's head in his lap and staunched the bleeding, or the man who died while shielding his own wife, or the people who bravely wrestled the ammo away from a madman... it's almost heady, this stuff. The bad was very, very bad. And I wish these folks had not been given the opportunity to show what they were made of on Saturday. But show it they did.

"The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not overcome it." As I looked at Jared Loughner's grinning, Joker-like mugshot, I realized I favor the King James Version even more now: "the light shineth in the darkness, and the darkness comprehended it not." Yes, I know that "comprehend" meant something different back then. But I'll take that play on words. Whatever darkness compelled Loughner to do what he did, and then to offer that sick grin to the world---the light that beamed back at the darkness was so bright. So incomprehensible. The darkness doesn't even get that kind of light.

Regarding the role (or not) of political rhetoric in creating a toxic environment and goading on the desperate, the sick and the armed, there's some really good stuff out there. This one by Stephen Budiansky is a current favorite for articulating a "let's take a look at this" position. (Not: "let's make some laws curtailing speech," or "let's arrest Sarah Palin and Sharron Angle for being accomplices." Both are strawmen.) The comments are respectful and interesting too.

Andrew Sullivan is my clearinghouse at the moment, and he's doing a great job presenting lots of different voices. I won't reproduce all of his links, but he's highlighted several liberal and moderate voices, and also many conservatives. Some have hunkered down and refused to engage in any self-reflection whatsoever, but others have been thoughtful and circumspect. As one conservative commentator put it,

I don’t think that questioning the possible role of political discourse in this tragedy merely represents callous opportunism on the part of the Left; it is a salutary human instinct after a tragedy of this dimension to search for any possible collective responsibility, even if that collectivity rarely includes oneself.

Read the whole thing. Read also this article by David Frum, no bleeding heart liberal himself, who takes Sarah Palin to task for missing the point of this whole discussion:

Palin failed to appreciate the question being posed to her. That question was not: “Are you culpable for the shooting?” The question was: “Having put this unfortunate image on the record, can you respond to the shooting in a way that demonstrates your larger humanity? And possibly also your potential to serve as leader of the entire nation?”

I thought this was a pretty infantile response, and thankfully, not very characteristic:

Our spirited political discourse, complete with name-calling, vilification—and, yes, violent imagery—is a good thing. Better that angry people unload their fury in public than let it fester and turn septic in private. The wicked direction the American debate often takes is not a sign of danger but of freedom. And I'll punch out the lights of anybody who tries to take it away from me.

I'm a big fan of the first amendment---my first job after college was for these guys---and agree that for the most part, the ill-advised words of doofuses and dolts are the price we pay for a free society. But it's simply not the case that if only people will publicly "unload" their ire, that things won't fester. As I have written here many times, venting does not diffuse negative feelings. It exacerbates them. This has actually been studied, folks.

All of this stuff has implications for Christians. We affirm that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. We believe that our sacred story has power; it's not just an entertaining story; it does something. And like the capital-W Word, our lowercase-w words also become enfleshed. Words make things possible. Words create and destroy. Words aren't cheap, they're costly. In the words of Teresa of Avila, "Words lead to deeds. They prepare the soul, make it ready, and move it to tenderness." Or they don't.

Image: Daniel Hernandez, the intern who is credited with helping save Gabrielle Giffords's life. When he heard the gunshots, he ran toward them.