Civil discourse and the Golden Rule – Casper Star-Tribune Online

Weve heard all about it repeatedly: our current society thrives on incivility. The public opinion du jour seems to be that the more extreme the speech, the more likely our message will be noticed. And if we disagree with one persons or groups opinion, the only way our opinion or message will be heard is to attack, vilify or silence that person or group.

Is this really what our society has come to? I personally have much greater faith in humanity than to believe incivility is the norm. We can all be an influence for good, and perhaps a groundswell of civility and kindness in our part of the world can influence others to follow suit. At the very core of our interactions with others, whether in person or in other formats, we can simply follow the Golden Rule: do unto others as you would have them do unto you. So, how do we apply this age-old axiom when we come across a message we disagree with?

Resist the urge to silence an opposing view.

Have you ever felt like your opinion was dismissed or ignored, perhaps because others disagreed with you? At a meeting I recently attended, I heard some people voice concerns about the negative impact social media has had on our societys incivility. Some blamed the anonymity and distance of these mass media forums, and others spoke of biased reporting in the media and the need to control these venues more.

Media is not the enemy. These mass media venues are merely a place for messages to be disseminated. In a day when more people have a voice, more people can have an audience. This opportunity to be heard is used by people of all views and beliefs. Stifling various views is not only ineffective; it goes against the Golden Rule. No one likes to be silenced, and if we allow opposing views to be expressed, we are more likely to have our own views heard.

Work to understand the other perspective.

As we work to allow all voices to be heard, its important to treat differing opinions with respect. Quentin Cook said, How we disagree is a real measure of who we are and whether we truly follow the Savior. It is appropriate to disagree, but it is not appropriate to be disagreeable.

Its easy to have civil conversations with those who have similar views as our own, but the true test of the Golden Rule comes when we are faced with an opposing view. Just as we want our views to be respected and understood, we must respect and try to understand the views of others.

Counter ignorance and fear with knowledge and compassion.

Sometimes incivility towards a view or group comes from ignorance. Perhaps a group acts or believes differently than those we normally associate with. Or perhaps we have no experience with a specific group. Its easier to understand when we know more about who they are and their perspectives. As we seek to know more, civility and compassion automatically follow.

Supreme Court Justices Antonin Scalia and Ruth Bader Ginsberg were excellent examples of this. Despite being on opposite ends of the political spectrum, they were close friends whose families spent holidays together and traveled together. They never let their differing views get in the way of that friendship.

Ultimately, when we seek civility in our discourse and interactions with others, we can never go wrong when we follow the Golden Rule. It will lead to greater understanding, compassion, and perhaps even friendship.

Read more:

Civil discourse and the Golden Rule - Casper Star-Tribune Online