Comments on: Gospel Civility and Joe Wilson’s Outburst

By: Kurt

Kurt — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 15:41:33 +0000

No decent, Christian mother would raise a child to behave like Mr. Wilson did.

By: Pat

Pat — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 14:47:44 +0000

Artificial speeches at artificial ceremonies may well deserve higher scrutiny than the ordinary off the cuff remark by Presidents, and in an address to both houses of Congress, why would citizens be complicit in allowing Congress to be on their best behavior and remain silent when that is most likely the only public forum in which a President can be challenged by Congress?

Is it what he says or doesn’t say that provokes such an outburst?

Isn’t it possible that a Congressional elector has an obligation not to be silent if lies are told at the podium just as they would be if they are told on a one to one basis?

Should the Congress sit still while being told lies?
Public decorum demands that knowledge be brought to the chamber as well as good behavior. Can knowledge be ignored in favor of appearances, for the sake of misrepresentation?

By: Francis

Francis — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 20:45:34 +0000

Wilson demonstrated the hate and division which now dominates discourse, especially on talk radio. The smooth talkers there have convinced their listeners that they are not ignorant, scared, limited people about to be left behind by a global economy; rather, they are freedon fighters protecting liberty. Wilson was supremely uncouth but it was good politics, in the same way that every time Palin utters a new inanity her poll numbers go up.

By: Michael J. Iafrate

Michael J. Iafrate — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 20:00:22 +0000

“but it looks to me like you’re more interested in being cute”.

Pots and kettles comes to mind.

Thanks for the compliment but I’m married.

By: Gabriel Austin

Gabriel Austin — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 18:29:20 +0000

Michael J. Iafrate writesSeptember 10, 2009 at 11:39
“You state that uncivility is justified when involved in deathdealing situations . . . such as tossing the money changers out of the Temple . . . how so, death dealing to the birds?
“The temple religious system was a system of wealth extraction, linked to the imperial system of wealth extraction. I’d be happy to provide you with some resources on this…

“but it looks to me like you’re more interested in being cute”.

Pots and kettles comes to mind.

By: rwbird

rwbird — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 18:29:00 +0000

Interestingly, Congressman Wilson’s “arrow of love” did not constitute uncivil behavior. I’ve written about this specific point at http://www.collapseofcivility.com.

What I appreciate in this post is that Kari Lundgren actually addresses the true incivility. If we reject the political debate and rhetoric on the subject of health care as a distraction, and step away from our own ideological bias, what are we called to do? Aren’t we called to provide for and help the sick, the lost, the dying, the orphans? Is that calling directed to be the helping only of certain class, type or nationality?

Name calling on the Senate floor is common. Higher crimes and misdemeanors have taken place in these chambers. While rude, Wilson was not uncivil. The event serves as a convenient distraction to keep us from facing the ugly truths and difficult choices that we must make.

Isn’t letting people suffer or die, when we have been mandated to provide the relief they seek – isn’t that uncivilized?

By: Gabriel Austin

Gabriel Austin — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 18:24:50 +0000

standmickey September 10, 2009 at 2:21 pm
“Beneath the complaints about incivility should be the question: did he lie?”

“Who? Bush? If you are talking about Bush, the answer to your question is a bit fat “Yes.”
“Now, the previous statement, in which [Mr. Obama] claimed that the bill would not cover abortions, was not true”.

That is to say, he lied.

By: Pinky

Pinky — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 04:59:53 +0000

Michael, I’m new around here. Every website has a different rythym, and while I do think that I was fair to your position, I was maybe too aggressive. Sorry.

I think it’s right to criticize Wilson for what he did, too.

By: Michael J. Iafrate

Michael J. Iafrate — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 04:39:13 +0000

You state that uncivility is justified when involved in deathdealing situations . . . such as tossing the money changers out of the Temple . . . how so, death dealing to the birds? The temple religious system was a system of wealth extraction, linked to the imperial system of wealth extraction. I'd be happy to provide you with some resources on this, but it looks to me like you're more interested in being cute. What about revolutions, e.g., the American Revolution, that was uncivil discourse taken to the extreme, was that justified given that it was primarily about issues such as taxation and limitations on the colonists ability to travel westward due to treaties the British had made with the Indians. The american revolution was not a just war.

By: Mark DeFrancisis

Mark DeFrancisis — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 04:09:14 +0000

Rep. Joe Wilson is also known for his defense of the Confederate battle flag that was flying over the South Carolina statehouse.

By: Michael J. Iafrate

Michael J. Iafrate — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 03:31:26 +0000

Kurt, I’m not sure if you’re disagreeing with me or with Michael. He quoted you misrepresenting me. I guess he is disagreeing with you, not me. If he is disagreeing with me based on your representation of me, then he probably isn't disagreeing with me at all. Civility is a relative good. Yes, it is. Though I think it is right to criticize the guy for what he did.

By: Zach

Zach — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 01:35:46 +0000

What a crock.

Civility is a relative good.