Suspend the Maryland Project from VOICE OF CHOICE 9SEP12

ANOTHER victory for women and choice and civility! This from Voice Of Choice....

Progress in Maryland Dear Volunteers, Thank all of you who have taken an interest in the Maryland Project. We have been providing information about John Clemens because he attacked the clinic workers at Dr. Carhart's office. I am pleased to say we can discontinue the project, at least for now. Voice of Choice has a goal to lower hate and rhetoric. While we may disagree with the beliefs and opinions of those on the pro-life side, we respect their rights to have their opinions. We stand up for those who are being bullied and harassed by people who do not respect the rights of others who disagree with them. In my interviews and blogs I continue to ask the same sarcastic question, "Don't you want the unsolicited opinions of strangers?" Of course no one does. That is what makes the phone calling campaigns effective. The people doing the harassing learn that what they are doing is uncomfortable and unchristian like. They also learn that they will not be able to bully people with impunity. I had a very civil dialog with John Clemens yesterday. John is passionate about his beliefs, like many of us. However, until Voice of Choice started to contact him he did not fully understand that not everyone feels the same way he does. I think that when you are totally involved in a cause you find a peer group that shares your passion and agree with you. That is John's peer group and people he spends his free time socializing with. The efforts of Voice of Choice have opened his eyes. He now understands how people outside his circle perceive his behavior and he may be able to communicate that to others close to him. John has promised not to contact or bully any clinic workers. He has promised to stay within socially acceptable limits while fighting for his cause. I am prepared to take John at his word, at least for now. Please stop calling John Clemens. We will keep track of John and everyone else who acts aggressively and ask for your participation in stopping unwanted behavior when it is warranted. Please consider this a victory for Voice of Choice. We were able to stop the attacks and bring down the level of hate. I look forward to your comments.     Thank you all again for your continued support.                             Todd

Republicans Cry About Lack of "Civility" at Dem Convention 8SEP12

THIS is so typical of the repiglicans and tea-baggers, always the victims, always being attacked, always getting the short end of the stick, always being unfairly picked on, persecuted, prosecuted, and maligned. Quick, somebody call them a waaambulance!!! Poor things! I gladly pass this on from HuffPost, joining in the "abuse" of mitt robme, lyin' paul ryan and their cabal.....
Predictably, the Romney campaign and its apparatchiks at Fox News accused the Democrats of lacking "civility" during the first day of their convention. RNC chairman Reince Priebus called the Democrats "classless" for showing a 1994 video of Ted Kennedy debating (and embarrassing) a decidedly more liberal Mitt Romney.
Boo-hoo.
You know who shouldn't be lecturing the Democrats about civility? The people who gave us swift-boating, the Southern Strategy, the outing of Valerie Plame, Birthers, Reverend Wright videos around the clock, "Obama pals around with domestic terrorists," the exploitation of 9/11, comparing a triple amputee Vietnam veteran to Saddam Hussein, the booing of a gay soldier, and the party that sported Purple Heart band-aids at the 2004 convention to mock another decorated Vietnam veteran, John Kerry, who was wounded in combat. And no one on the floor of the Democratic convention hurled peanuts at an African American camerawomen, shouting, "This is how we feed the animals."
Yes, the Democratic speakers unapologetically jabbed Romney for having a Swiss bank account and for being a shameless prevaricator. They criticized his policy proposals for being the usual Reaganomics claptrap we've heard during every election and, accurately enough, how the same policies caused the recession. There's a difference between taking fair shots at an opponent and the reprehensible tactics routinely exercised by the Republicans.
I totally get it: since the dawn of history, politics has always been about rigorous debate, passionate arguments, salient framing and rhetorical aggression. That's not incivility. That's politics. But the Republicans always appear shocked whenever the Democrats bring their A-game to political contest, and then they hilariously lean on this well-worn "civility" crutch with full knowledge that the party's PR wing, AM talk radio and Fox News Channel, has made a fortune in cash and ratings by calling the president a communist, a traitor and a "little black man child."
The Democratic Party finally and thankfully stood up for its values and, most noticeably, its position on social issues. The party was unafraid to feature leaders from NARAL and Planned Parenthood on the stage. Various speakers talked repeatedly about reproductive rights, civil rights, LGBT rights and the role of government and how "we the people" ought to lend a hand to those who have nowhere else to turn. Core liberal values. Likewise, the party made it clear that Mitt Romney and the Republicans are the enemy of these values. And they are. They've pledged to repeal all of the advances in these areas upon arriving at the White House. Last night, an actual undocumented worker named Benita Veliz -- an illegal immigrant, the latest brand of "evildoer" -- spoke at the convention. On top of that, right-wing lightning rod Sandra Fluke spoke during prime time and thanked the Democrats for "amplifying" her voice in spite of brutal attacks from Rush Limbaugh and others who not only lied about her testimony to Congress but publicly and relentlessly slandered her reputation for weeks, calling her a "slut."
Tell me again about civility, Republicans.
Frankly, I think this notion of taking a firm stand on core values hit really close to home for the Republicans who've nominated a candidate whose positions change by the day, interspersed with universally debunked lies. Simply put: Romney and Ryan don't seem to stand for anything -- you know, other than doing the exact opposite of President Obama.
On the same day when American voters were talking about powerful speeches from the First Lady and Julian Castro, The Nation reported that the increasingly shaky and awkward Paul Ryan actively lobbied the Obama administration for money from Obamacare, specifically for a community healthcare center in Racine. The Affordable Care Act provides $9.5 billion for health centers and $1.5 billion for a series of brand new centers, and Paul Ryan wanted a piece of the action while demonizing Obamacare's "reckless spending" and how it's a "government takeover." We've heard this before. Ryan also requested money from the dreaded stimulus while voting against it and while using it as a cudgel to utterly skull-bash the president's agenda.
But I suppose I'm not being civil by pointing out Ryan's obvious lack of integrity, say nothing of the top of the ticket whose home planet eradicated integrity centuries ago while purging itself of emotions and authenticity during the final epoch of the Alpha Centauri Interstellar Conundrum.
So the contrast between a strong Democratic Party and a flaky, unstable, flip-floppy Republican Party has prompted the GOP to spend the week whining and pooping its big boy pants about how the Democrats are being so mean. For a Republican Party dependent upon lies and intellectual dishonesty, the truth really hurts.
Cross-posted at The Daily Banter.
Subscribe to the uncensored and totally raw Bob & Chez Show After Party podcast.
Click here to listen to the Bubble Genius Bob & Chez Show podcast.
Bob Cesca's Awesome Blog! Go!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-cesca/republicans-cry-about-lac_b_1862013.html?utm_source=Alert-blogger&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Email%2BNotifications 

As Obama urged unity, Palin brought division from WASHINGTON POST 13JAN11

WE all need to try harder to be civil in our discussions, postings, interaction with each other, God knows I do and I am asking Him to help me do so. That doesn't mean not discussing and posting my opinions and articles reflecting my views, it does mean not including anything that incites hatred and verbal of physical violence, and not including anything that can not be backed up with some sort of facts. And I have the responsibility to make available, as well as possible, reference points and sources for anyone interested so they can go to them and make their own decisions on the issues of the day.  This from Dan Balz of the Washington Post on Pres Obama's Tucson memorial speech and sarah palin's comments.....
 
President Obama did not miss the moment. From the generally positive overnight reaction, Obama's speech in Tucson on Wednesday night struck just the right notes. Amid grief over a senseless tragedy and against a raging debate that threatened to further divide the country, the president urged healing and reconciliation.
The role of mourner-in-chief is relatively new in the history of the presidency, but it is now an important part of the job description for anyone who seeks the nation's highest office. In times of tragedy, people turn to presidents to help soothe the pain and bind the wounds, to give hope at times where there is little or resolve when it is needed.
Ronald Reagan did it with a short and eloquent Oval Office address the night that the shuttle Challenger exploded shortly after takeoff in 1986. Bill Clinton did it with a pointed and yet uplifting speech at a memorial after the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995. George Bush did it after Sept. 11, 2001, first at Washington National Cathedral with sobering words at a somber ceremony and later that day from the rubble of Ground Zero with belligerence offered through a bullhorn.
Obama had been there before - after the massacre at Fort Hood in the first year of his presidency and after the coal mine disaster in West Virginia last spring. But Tucson presented a unique challenge, with a congresswoman the target of the attack in a state that has been roiled politically by violence, hot rhetoric and strong actions that had drawn national attention and condemnation.
Wednesday's event in Tucson was billed as a memorial service to the six dead and the many wounded, including Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.), who remains in critical condition after being shot in the head. It became something else, unsettling to some - a moment of release for a community still in shock, a pep rally of sorts complete with cheers and applause and whistling at every line from every speaker that was meant to convey hope and optimism. It was anything but the somber service that many people may have expected.
Before the speech, White House officials told reporters the president's remarks would mostly focus on the victims. While partly true, their description mischaracterized the totality of what Obama decided to try to do with his time on the stage. Without assigning blame and in words shorn of partisanship, he delivered a political message. He asked all Americans to use the tragedy to make themselves and the country better - as a way of paying tribute to those who had been killed or wounded.
"The loss of these wonderful people should make every one of us strive to be better in our private lives - to be better friends and neighbors, co-workers and parents," he said. "And if, as has been discussed in recent days, their deaths help usher in more civility in our public discourse, let's remember that it is not because a simple lack of civility caused this tragedy, but rather because only a more civil and honest public discourse can help us face up to our challenges as a nation, in a way that would make them proud."
The president's speech was unique, given the circumstances. It was lengthy - more than 30 minutes - when most presidents have chosen to be brief. It was not partisan but it was political, causing some negative reaction. Most important, it offered Obama an opportunity to reprise the message of unity and hope that first made him a national figure. If he offered implicit criticism of what has transpired since the shootings, it was aimed as much at those on the left who have sought to link the shootings to right-wing rhetoric.
He said: "At a time when our discourse has become so sharply polarized - at a time when we are far too eager to lay the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who think differently than we do - it's important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we are talking with each other in a way that heals, not a way that wounds."
Whether Obama's speech changes the trajectory of his presidency will be a subtopic of the post-Tucson political discussion. For all the reasons that people now point to Clinton's Oklahoma City speech as a turning point in his fortunes after the Democrats' debacle of 1994, many now will look to see whether Tucson proves that kind of moment for Obama.
Perhaps. The circumstances of the two events do not provide a neat comparison, given that the bombings were the acts of anti-government terrorists and the Tucson shootings appear to be the work of a deranged man with no clear political identity. More than public reaction to Obama's speech will determine its effect on his presidential fortunes. As important is how Obama internalizes this episode in the context of how he governs.
The political debate that erupted within hours of Saturday's shootings was a reminder of the depth of the divisions in the country today. Obama sought to elevate himself out of that climate of apportioning blame, as presidents can do in such circumstances. It is where he appears most comfortable as a politician but, as his presidency has shown, not an easily maintained position. In his first two years, he was unable to change the tone in Washington, as he had promised.
Policy debates await him that will soon thrust him back into the political and partisan realms, where he has sometimes proved thin-skinned and defensive. His calls for civility and unity will bump against the real differences that divide the two parties. Those times will test whether he can continue to unify the country or change the tone, or at least command a real majority.
The contrast between Obama and Sarah Palin was especially striking. Wednesday was a textbook example of how two politicians chose to handle a moment of national tragedy. Perhaps by an accident of timing, Palin put herself into the same news cycle as the president. After several days of silence, she offered her first extended commentary on the shootings.
Much of what she said was proper, but not all. Michael Gerson, who was Bush's chief speechwriter and has been no fan of Palin, observed on CNN Wednesday night that her speech was "seven minutes Reagan and 30 seconds Spiro Agnew." Her careless use of the charged words "blood libel" to criticize those who she believed had unfairly attacked her and other conservatives created more controversy, not less.
Obama has proven to be a polarizing figure in office, but on Wednesday he sought to unify. Palin ended up dividing. On a day of scripted messages, presumably carefully considered, Obama made the most of his. Palin did not.

 

Obama's powerful Tucson omission

By Jonathan Capehart

Some of the most poignant words of any speech are the ones that don't appear in the prepared text, if one exists. They are the ones that bubble forth during delivery. Because they are unscripted, their authenticity and their power are immediately felt. President George W. Bush's "I can hear you" moment on a smoldering pile at Ground Zero is a prime example. And last night, President Obama gave us one of his own.
The moment came near the end of his peroration on the need for civility in our national debate, and he tied it to the memory of slain nine-year-old Christina Taylor Green. The prepared text read:

I want us to live up to her expectations. I want our democracy to be as good as she imagined it. All of us - we should do everything we can to make sure this country lives up to our children's expectations.

But when it came to deliver the lines, Obama -- in either a rhetorical slip or a deliberate omission -- dropped the "us" in that first line. "I want to live up to her expectations," the president said.
For the first time in an address that soared at 30,000 feet, Obama came down to earth. Through a simple line, Obama powerfully and personally embraced his own demand of Americans. "All of us," he went on to say, "we should do everything we can do to make sure this country lives up to our children's expectations." It was as if he were implicitly taking responsibility for whatever role he played in the nation's toxic political discourse. After a tragedy such as Tucson, that's what leaders do.

SIGN THE PEACE AND CIVILITY PLEDGE from SOJOURNERS 11JAN11

The recent shooting of Gabrielle Giffords, the congresswoman from Arizona, must speak to the soul of this nation. The shooter raised his gun to her head, and then he kept shooting until 13 others were wounded and six people killed, including a district court judge and a 9-year-old girl who was in her church choir. We all mourn the lives lost and hope and pray for the recovery of those who were injured.

I was with Gabby just a week ago, as our families celebrated New Year’s at a retreat in South Carolina. I count her as a friend. We talked about her very tough election this fall, which she won by a few thousand votes in one of the most divided states in the nation, where -- much like the rest of the country -- the political rhetoric has become more and more poisonous and personal.

What are the situations and environments that allow this kind of hate and violence to grow? How can we not only stop conflict, but also be a part of bringing about a just community that displays the positive presence of peace?

We start with ourselves. Our Peace and Civility Pledge outlines the higher standards that scripture calls us to in how we are to treat one another and act in community. I ask you to sign the Pledge, consider how these teachings are being manifested in your life, and share it with a friend, your church, your family.

Last Spring, we began this important work with over 100 prominent Christian leaders who signed the “Civility Covenant.” Each one committed to modeling civil discourse, even with people they disagree with. In a divided world each one made a commitment to model the peace of Christ in their lives and their communities. They recognized that many of us who would never consider violence of the fist have been guilty of violence in our hearts and with our tongues.

Part of building a better society is relating to others with whom we disagree on important issues without calling them evil. It is out of that work that we recommit ourselves to being peacemakers in our country. It is on that Covenant that we have based this new Pledge.

As the county sheriff in charge of the criminal scene in Tucson said on Saturday, this must be an occasion for national “soul searching.” In the midst of tragedy and violence, I believe this means every Christian must ask: “How am I responsible?”

To that end, we encourage you to reflect with us all, using the Pledge as a starting place for scriptural teaching. Please share your thoughts, prayers, confessions, and hopes on our Facebook page or on the God’s Politics blog.

This horrible tragedy must now become an important American moment. We must honor this tragic event and Gabby’s national service by reflecting deeply on how we speak to and about one another, and how we create environments that help peace grow -- or allow violence and hatred to enter. 

Blessings and peace,
Jim Wallis

Peace and Civility Pledge

The horrible shooting of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and others is an important American moment. We strive to honor this tragic event by reflecting deeply on how we speak to and about one another, and how we create environments that help peace grow -- or allow violence and hatred to enter. 

Peace and Civility Pledge
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The church can offer a message of hope and reconciliation to a nation that is hurting and deeply divided. We urge those who claim the name of Christ to "put away from you all bitterness and wrath and anger and wrangling and slander, together with all malice, and be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ has forgiven you" (Ephesians 4:31-32).

We pledge to God and to each other that we will lead by example in a country where civil discourse and peacemaking are rare. We will work to model a better way in how we treat each other in our many communities, across religious and political lines. We will strive to create safe and sacred spaces for common prayer and community discussion as we come together to seek God's will for our nation and our world.

1.) We believe Jesus' teaching that "Blessed are those who make peace" (Matthew 5:9). We acknowledge that most of us have been guilty of violence in our hearts and with our tongues. We hold ourselves to the higher standard to which Christ called us: to refrain from not only physical violence but violence of the heart and tongue. "Do not commit murder. Anyone who murders will be judged for it," and "Do not be angry with your brother or sister" (Mathew 5:22-23).

2.) We commit that our dialogue with each other will reflect the spirit of the Scriptures, which tell us, in relating to each other, to be "quick to listen, slow to speak, and slow to become angry" (James 1:19).

3.) We believe that each of us, and our fellow human beings, are created in the image of God. This belief should be reflected in the honor and respect we show to each other, particularly in how we speak. "With the tongue we bless the Lord and Father, and with it we curse those who are made in the likeness of God....this ought not to be so" (James 3:9,10).

4.) We pledge that when we disagree, we will do so respectfully, without falsely impugning the other's motives, attacking the other's character, or questioning the other's faith. We will be mindful of our language, being neither arrogant nor boastful in our beliefs as we strive to "be completely humble and gentle; be patient, bearing with one another in love" (Ephesians 4:2).

5.) We recognize that we cannot function together as citizens of the same community, whether local or national, unless we are mindful of how we treat each other. Each of us must therefore "put off falsehood and speak truthfully to his neighbor, for we are all members of one body" (Ephesians 4:25).

6.) We commit to pray for our political leaders - those with whom we agree or disagree. "I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made -- for kings and all who are in high positions" (1 Timothy 2:1-2).

7.) We believe that it is more difficult to hate others, even adversaries and enemies, when we are praying for them. We commit to pray for each other, those with whom we agree and those with whom we may disagree, so that we may be faithful witnesses to our Lord, who prayed "that they may be one" (John 17:22).



Affirmed and signed by,
[Your Name]
[Your Address]
[City, State ZIP]

Your information:

*Required fields

  Title:

Mr. Ms. Mrs. Miss Dr.

* First Name:

* Last Name:

* Your Email:

* ZIP / Postal Code:

  Country:

Choose a Country United States Canada Mexico Afghanistan Albania Algeria American Samoa Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia-Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory Brunei Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Cook Islands Costa Rica Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic East Timor Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands Faroe Islands Fiji Finland Former Czechoslovakia Former USSR France French Guyana French Southern Territories Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Great Britain Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe (French) Guam (USA) Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Heard and McDonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras Hong Kong Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Ivory Coast (Cote D'Ivoire) Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic (Kyrgyzstan) Laos Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macau Macedonia Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Martinique (French) Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Micronesia Moldavia Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands Netherlands Antilles New Caledonia (French) New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island Northern Mariana Islands North Korea Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Island Poland Polynesia (French) Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar Reunion (French) Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Helena Saint Kitts & Nevis Anguilla Saint Lucia Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Tome and Principe Saint Vincent & Grenadines Samoa San Marino Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles S. Georgia & S. Sandwich Isls. Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Korea Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Islands Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syria Tadjikistan Taiwan Tanzania Thailand Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom Uruguay USA Minor Outlying Islands Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela Vietnam Virgin Islands (British) Virgin Islands (USA) Wallis and Futuna Islands Western Sahara Yemen Zaire Zambia Zimbabwe

  Remember me. What's this?

If you take action and have not already registered, you will receive periodic updates and communications from Sojourners.

The mission of Sojourners is to articulate the biblical call to social justice, inspiring hope and building a movement to transform individuals, communities, the church, and the world.

	HOME | SUBSCRIBE | DONATE | TAKE ACTION | MAGAZINE SOJOMAIL | BLOGS | MEDIA | EVENTS | RESOURCES | ABOUT US Sojourners | 3333 14th Street, Suite 200 | Washington, DC 20010 Phone 202.328.8842 | Fax 202.328.8757 | sojourners@sojo.net Unless otherwise noted, all material © Sojourners

7 STEPS TO CIVILITY THIS ELECTION SEASON from SOJO 7OKT10

I KNOW this applies to me as much as to anyone else, and I will try to do better.....
 
Last week, I asked you all to tell FOX News that when it comes to truth and civility, they can do better. Thousands of you did. You aren't the only ones who see things getting worse than ever before. This week, a group of more than 130 former legislators, both Republicans and Democrats, released a letter urging for civility and encouraging candidates, once elected, to focus on cooperation to face our country's greatest challenges.The letter said:

None of us shrank from partisan debates while in Congress or from the partisan contests getting there. During our time in Congress, partisans on the other side may have been our opponents on some bills and our adversaries on some issues. They were not, however, the enemy.

They point the finger at both parties for this breakdown; how legislators hold on to "wedge issues" to run on, as opposed to finding common-ground solutions. The letter also recognized the outside forces at work:

The divisive and mean-spirited way debate often occurs inside Congress is encouraged and repeated outside: on cable news shows, in blogs, and in rallies. Members who far exceed the bounds of normal and respectful discourse are not viewed with shame but are lionized, treated as celebrities, rewarded with cable television appearances, and enlisted as magnets for campaign fund-raisers.

These public servants are no longer in office but do us all a great public service. They are sounding the alarm about the direction of our public discourse.
This past spring, a diverse group of more than 100 religious leaders signed their names and committed to a "Civility Covenant." We joined together recognizing that too often we have reflected the political divisions of our culture rather than the unity we have in the body of Christ. We came together to urge those who claim the name of Christ to "put away from you all bitterness and wrath and anger and wrangling and slander, together with all malice, and be kind to one another, tender-hearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ has forgiven you" (Ephesians 4:31-32).
We made seven biblically based commitments that I believe are seven steps we all need to take for truth and civility today. These are seven commitments that Christians should carry with them as a reminder for themselves and a challenge to others. Candidates need to know that voters do not just care about who wins, but how they win. The Civility Covenant states:

1. We commit that our dialogue with each other will reflect the spirit of the scriptures, where our posture toward each other is to be "quick to listen, slow to speak, and slow to become angry" (James 1:19).
2. We believe that each of us, and our fellow human beings, are created in the image of God. The respect we owe to God should be reflected in the honor and respect we show to each other in our common humanity, particularly in how we speak to each other. "With the tongue we bless the Lord and [God], and with it we curse those who are made in the likeness of God ... this ought not to be so" (James 3:9-10).
3. We pledge that when we disagree, we will do so respectfully, without falsely impugning the other's motives, attacking the other's character, or questioning the other's faith, and recognizing in humility that in our limited, human opinions, "we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror" (1 Corinthians 13:12). We will therefore "be completely humble and gentle; be patient, bearing with one another in love" (Ephesians 4:2).
4. We will ever be mindful of the language we use in expressing our disagreements, being neither arrogant nor boastful in our beliefs: "Before destruction one's heart is haughty, but humility goes before honor" (Proverbs 18:12).
5. We recognize that we cannot function together as citizens of the same community, whether local or national, unless we are mindful of how we treat each other in pursuit of the common good, in the common life we share together. Each of us must therefore "put off falsehood and speak truthfully to his neighbor, for we are all members of one body" (Ephesians 4:25).
6. We commit to pray for our political leaders -- those with whom we may agree, as well as those with whom we may disagree. "I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made -- for kings and all who are in high positions" (1 Timothy 2:1-2).
7. We believe that it is more difficult to hate others, even our adversaries and our enemies, when we are praying for them. We commit to pray for each other, those with whom we agree and those with whom we may disagree, so that together we may strive to be faithful witnesses to our Lord, who prayed "that they may be one" (John 17:22).

We need to push back against the fear-mongering and name-calling and lead with our values.
Here are some ideas:
Send this covenant to all the candidates running for Congress, Senate, and governorship in your districts and states. Submit the covenant to their websites. Take it to their forums, debates, and rallies and publicly challenge candidates to sign it.
Send letters to the editors of your local newspapers calling for civility and lifting up this covenant. Contact your TV and radio stations to tell them you expect more from them.
Finally, take the covenant to church. Give it to the members of your congregation. Give it to your pastor. Ask your pastor to preach on the need for civility in this election season. It's up to us now.

Former Legislators Sound a Warning, Call for Civility

by Jim Wallis 10-05-2010

Yesterday, a group of more than 130 former legislators, both Republicans and Democrats, released a letter urging for civility and encouraging candidates, once elected, to focus on cooperation to face our country’s greatest challenges. The letter said:

None of us shrank from partisan debates while in Congress or from the partisan contests getting there. During our time in Congress, partisans on the other side may have been our opponents on some bills and our adversaries on some issues. They were not, however, the enemy.

Indeed, when did the other side of the aisle go from “honorable adversary” to the enemy?  I’ve spoken to many of these political leaders over the years. They all tell me that heavy partisanship is not new, but an overt hostility toward the other side is clearly increasing and is a disturbing trend. Senators of different parties rarely have meals or drinks together anymore, which used to be common. Especially over the past few decades, the chance for Senators of different parties to get to know each other personally, or even their colleagues’ families, has steadily dwindled. They now normally eat their lunches with their caucus or donors.
The letter goes on:

Congress appears gripped by zero-sum game partisanship. The goal often seems to be more to devastate the other side (the enemy, no longer the honorable adversary) than to find common ground to solve problems, much less to have a spirited but civil debate about how to do so.

They point the finger at both parties for this breakdown. How legislators hold on to “wedge issues” to run on as opposed to finding common ground solutions. The letter also recognized the outside forces at work:

The divisive and mean-spirited way debate often occurs inside Congress is encouraged and repeated outside: on cable news shows, in blogs, and in rallies. Members who far exceed the bounds of normal and respectful discourse are not viewed with shame but are lionized, treated as celebrities, rewarded with cable television appearances, and enlisted as magnets for campaign fund-raisers.

These public servants are no longer in office but do us all a great public service. They are sounding the alarm about the direction of our public discourse.
But, since their press conference on Monday, there has been scant coverage of their warning bell, even though the letter was signed by a large and thoroughly bipartisan group of our most distinguished former members of the Senate and the House. Makes you wonder if a big part of the problem is the media itself who seems to love the combat and confrontation and does all it can to exacerbate it. The media doesn’t really believe that civility is sexy. But conflict truly is. While it sometimes decrys the poisonous political debate. (This morning a commentator said of the mid-term election campaign, “It’s getting really rough out there,” with a big smile on his face.)
The fact that the media is helping to lead us off the cliff into the politics of fear and the politics of blame is not a story that it is likely to cover. But the one it should be covering is how the blame and fear politics that is now so prevalent will deny us the politics that we most need — the politics of solutions.
Civility may not be sexy, but it is now key to our political salvation. Read the letter from the former legislators carefully, read all the signatures, and compare their wisdom to the words of the people who want your vote this fall.
Jim Wallis is the author of Rediscovering Values: On Wall Street, Main Street, and Your Street — A Moral Compass for the New Economy, and CEO of Sojourners. He blogs at www.godspolitics.com. Follow Jim on Twitter @JimWallis.