A Case for Civil Discourse
Posted in Politics and tagged with Barack Obama, Debate, politics on August 17, 2009
Civility (n) – politeness, the act of showing regard for others
Civility…that’s a good word, no? Then why is it sorely lacking from political debate in this country?
I love a good discussion. Whether I’m discussing an issue with someone who I mostly agree with or with someone I mostly disagree with, I believe it’s healthy to question and examine one’s assumptions. It’s rare that my views are not changed or at least fine-tuned after a discussion of an important matter. Being forced to state my views in a comprehensible way helps me realize my argument’s weaknesses and recognize any unfounded and unjustified claims.
So why do people think that yelling at one another and calling one another names is a good thing? Why do they think that this is “debate?” Why are talk radio shows and cable news programs filled with venomous, vacuous speech? Do they even think it’s helpful, or is their only aim to disrupt their sworn enemies (because we’re really at war and there can be no middle ground)?
Perhaps I’m naive, but I believe that there is a place for meaningful debate. That doesn’t mean that we’ll walk away from the table at the end of the day with the same opinions, but we can walk away with a greater respect and understanding of one another and an idea on the things that we can agree on. While I don’t agree with the President on many of the issues, I share his belief that there is a place for meaningful discussion beyond party, religious, cultural, and racial differences. I believe our country would be a better place if more people believed this, but I also believe that the sinfulness of man will always taint how we relate to one another.
Photo by Jenn Jenn
Related posts:
- Tar and Feathers? Why do I get so defense when someone slams the...
- Mine! Mine! Mine! We’ve all heard, reheard, and heard again that famous JFK quote,...
- Parents and the President I know, I know, two posts today! I’m thinking if...
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
August 17th, 2009 at 10:42 am
When you study the founders of our constitution, you’ll find they had very raucus debates. Sometimes, polite handshakes don’t accomplish anything. I’m sure during the American Revolution against Brittain, they nice talk didn’t get Americans their freedom.
Sometimes, polite “tones” in conversation gives the wrong message–it says, “You can run right over me.” What do children do when their parents aren’t listening to their requests? They tug harder and ask louder. What should we do when our government officials won’t listen to requests, presented with civility? When they tell us we aren’t smart enough to figure this out for ourselves? I guess we have to tug harder and ask louder.
Your post really perked up my day–like a cup of coffee! Be blessed in your day!
August 17th, 2009 at 11:24 am
I have to lean towards agreeing with maryleigh’s remarks. The term “the squeaky wheel gets the grease” most definitely applies in our worldly culture. This does not mean that it’s correct, only that often it is the ones who yell the loudest or are the rudest that are the most effective at their jobs…whatever that “job” may be.
Maryleigh used the example with children which can happen often in a home. I personally believe that discipline should be enforced when the child does not respond after the first time being spoken to. This would lead to less yelling. However, say in a marital situation, this does not apply and unfortunately, this is how “debates” or “discussions” turn into vicious arguments.
I don’t think you’re naive at all in thinking that civility is a good thing and should be enforced wherever and whenever possible. I also believe that your last sentence sums up why that will not always happen. Thanks for such a thoughtful post. I think it may remind me this week of how to remain civil in my own life…not just in discussing politics.
August 17th, 2009 at 12:29 pm
Maryleigh: I don’t think being polite necessarily means “You can run right over me.” One can be firm, yet calm. One can colorfully and articulately make a point without calling names and mischaracterizing the other side. If our government is not doing what they should, we can/should be outspoken. It’s the manner of how we go about it that I’m questioning.
Elizabeth: I believe that we can accomplish as much by keeping our character, being firm, and not stooping to the tactics of the world (not saying that you’re saying that we should do those things). Just because it’s not as easy, doesn’t mean it won’t work. If our government isn’t doing the right thing, I think we SHOULD be shouting from our rooftops and making a point. But that still can be done in a way that respects others as human beings.
August 17th, 2009 at 12:56 pm
I just couldn’t agree more with what you have posted! I mean why can’t people just respect other people’s opinions and consider them! maybe others have better opinions than you, which can change your perspective for better! but if only people ahd this in them, the world would be a lot different!
August 17th, 2009 at 1:08 pm
I couldn’t agree more. Honestly, I rarely, rarely read personal blogs when women post about politics. I have seen things turn really nasty, very quickly.
August 17th, 2009 at 1:17 pm
I completely agree. I will counter that with something that I have learned the hard way though (that I’m sure you know as well). We can’t expect people who are not Christian to act with Christian characteristics. We shouldn’t expect anyone to act like something they’re not (I’m not saying you do – I’m saying we as a population). I do recognize that in many ways this thought could lead to the self-fulfilling prophecy theory (if you expect people to act badly they will).
August 17th, 2009 at 3:42 pm
Thank you! I wholeheartedly agree. So many people consider the fact that they are yelling about something back and forth “debating.” Insults become their basis for argument and I just don’t understand their justification.
I wish that more people were able to put aside their personal feelings about matters, or at least respect the ideas of others for long enough to see other views and expand their own knowledge. I personally love to talk to other people about ideas and hear what other people have to say about the matter but so often when I question them they get defensive and just insult me. Not everyone is capable of debate or exchanging ideas or beliefs without it turning into battles, which is quite unfortunate.
August 17th, 2009 at 7:03 pm
One of the hardest things I have had to do in my life is to realize that there are times other people do have good ideas and I need to stop and listen instead of always thinking my way or no way. sugar attracks more than vinegar. and quietness so the other person has to listen to hear instead of the yelling. No wonder there are conflicts and wars when the basic families cannot agree and work together.
August 17th, 2009 at 9:35 pm
I completely agree! That being said, I’m one of those people that needs to argue the heck out of something rather than concede to a point.
That being said, I don’t yell and scream.
August 17th, 2009 at 10:59 pm
i don’t mind deep discussions, but i find that I often shy away from them, as they do lead to heated debates. i hate arguing or yelling, etc. too bad people can’t be civil…
August 18th, 2009 at 10:07 pm
i agree with you. :)
August 18th, 2009 at 11:33 pm
Part of the problem is that the line between discussion and entertainment has been blurred into non-existence.
While people might learn something from having a deep, fact-laden conversation about ideas and principles, it’s more entertaining to watch two people shout at each other and call names.
I guess.
Another issue is that certain commentators have helped cast all who disagree with them not only as wrong, but evil. If you were against the Iraq War, you were a terrorist-supporter. If you’re against this health care bill, then you just want people to die. There is probably more name-calling on news channels and talk radio these days than on grade school playgrounds.
August 19th, 2009 at 10:10 am
[...] A Case for Civil Discourse [...]