Active RNS subscribers and members can view this content at the RNS Archives website.

(RNS) Thank you, Family Research Council, for now conceding what conservative groups have been loath to acknowledge in recent years: the truth that incendiary rhetoric indeed does contribute to a climate conducive to politically motivated violence. By Tom Krattenmaker.

1 Comment

  1. My opinion is that politicians and, more often than not, the media live on rhetoric. They join in the feeding frenzy that incites “hatred”. It’s more immediately advantageous of these groups to divide people with an “us vs. them” mentality. And so meaningful dialog is missing in our country today. People “parrot” what they hear the pols and media types say as they point their fingers at those who have opposing points of view and spew meaningless, but very destructive accusations. Destructive particularly to civility and to meaningful discussion.

    It is no help when the Left refers to people who are for the traditional view of marriage as “haters” of homosexual people. Taking that stance doesn’t make one a hater. The “left” also claim to corner the market on women’s issues, and if someone believes that the unborn should be treated as a vital part of human community, then those people are women “haters” making “war on women.” In reality more women identify themselves as pro-life than are pro-choice. From the “right” I thought it was appalling when the “conservatives” did a witch hunt on President Clinton. And what did they come up with? He was found to be an unfaithful husband, and lied about it. What a waste of money and time in an effort to manufacture an “enemy” so conservatives could fund raise. Add to that the ridiculous idea of the “birthers” who claim Obama really wasn’t born in the U.S.??The dialog need to be about what the candidates have done and believe, and based on their actions and honest and transparent beliefs, what are they actually capable of doing. But this gets lost, and the U.S. is weaker in large measure because of this.