Democratic congresswoman shot in Arizona.

[richardhutnik]

badgenome said:

richardhutnik said:

Defend it would be that one believes such a prayer is an appropriate one to use.  I would speak mainly from a Christian perspective here, and what Jesus taught.  It would be like the correlary to Godwin's Law, that states that once Hitler is brought you, the discourse has gone too far and can't be justified in any manner to continue.  I do see the issue with Gifford, and what came out of it, as a time to review current political language being used. 

Actually, Godwin's Law only says that as an online discussion continues, the probability of a comparison to Nazis approaches 1. See NinjaguyDan's post above.

Maybe there is a good reason for people to cool their rhetorical jets. I'm all for it if it helps people focus on issues rather than personal attacks (although Jack Shafer has a great article up on Slate in defense of heated political rhetoric), but not for this reason. This kid was so far gone that it's impossible for me to believe that current mainstream political debates/shouting matches/whatever have anything to do with his shooting up a Safeway. The parallels between him and the Columbine kids or Cho-seung Hui are too great to ignore.

And already people who want to silence others are sharpening their legislative knives. Just look at Bob Brady's suggestion that it should be illegal to draw bullseyes or crosshairs on a map. Not only is it yet another allusion to the harebrained theory that this kid, with his long history of mental problems and deviant behavior, was inspired by a relatively obscure map on Sarah Palin's website, it's sadly ironic that he would do this in "honor" of Giffords, who stood on the House floor to read the First Amendment not even a week ago.

When mention Godwin's Law, I mention the correlaries people have shot off of it, in that, once Hitler pops up, people begin to realize maybe the discussion has gone too far (one of the correlaries is the discussion will soon end).

I also do think there is need for people to cool it, but would ask people do a personal assessment of the situation and decide on their own, rather than we have some thought police rules that would come down from above that end up trying to ban things.  I have argued that a nation where people don't police themselves locally will be governed from politicians above, likely nationally. 

Best thing here is to get a pulse on what is going on, and see how things could be turned for the better, even if what had happened doesn't quite match to the situation.  Like now, this shouldn't be talk of how the Tea Party flames hate, but should be insane people.  In this, discussion of personal liberties and how to properly use them would be on order.  Mentioning responsibilities, besides arguing for "rights" would be constructive here I believe.