Peter 2:1: “So get rid of all evil behavior. Be done with all deceit, hypocrisy, jealousy, and all unkind speech.”

So much rancor in the world. So much unrest. There have always been people who say provocative things for notoriety, money, entertainment, influence, revenge, attention or because they are simply cantankerous. The point is to provoke. It is the provocation that leads to the perceived or real reward.

In a world where social media and infotainment networks crank provocation and response 24/7, the weight can feel especially heavy. An analogy that makes sense to me is that one such encounter is like a mosquito bite. It is irritating and really no big deal. But if the bites keep coming without stopping, it isn’t long until you are miserable. The bites can even become toxic and damage your health.

So what are we to do? It is easy to lash out and spread your discomfort. Psychology tells us that the most frequent response to anger is blame. But misdirected blame only adds to the provocations. A dangerous response is to seek to take away freedoms or harm others through censure, censorship, repression, book banning, doxing, and endless culture wars. Why are these responses dangerous and potentially unconstitutional? Our founding fathers knew that whomever had power or whomever could sway or coerce the masses could control the narrative. This ultimately leads to limited or repressed speech and unequal rights. So to protect the rights of the minority (an ultimately all of us), the first amendment was added.

I often do not like what I read. Sometimes I force myself to read opinions that make my blood boil (there are any number of cruel, racist, sexist, or ignorant rants available in opinion columns everywhere). I disagree. I shake my head. I fact check. And then I turn the page. I close the book. I scroll past. I change the channel. I may even craft a rebuttal or determine how to take responsible civic action.

I do not try to silence people whose opinions I don’t like. I do not deny their right to exist or have thought. I do not try to punish them. I engage in dialogue …..or not. Having said that, I remember the red line that should not be crossed. “You do not have right to yell fire in a crowded theater unless there is an actual fire .” This is a metaphor that tells us we do not have right to endanger the lives of others just for fun or because we can. If there is actual danger shout a warning. If you just want to see people run scared and potentially be trampled, keep your mouth firmly shut.

So what are we to do in this current environment? There is an adage (no one really knows where is comes from) to “let everything that passes through your lips go through three doors…is it true….is it necessary….is it kind?”

If what you are sharing is not true it shouldn’t be shared. Sharing untruths only happens because you, the sharer, are ignorant (don’t have all the information) of facts or because you fully intend to harm/manipulate. If it is the former, then retract your statement and when you know better, do better. If it is the latter, nothing I say will matter. You have already decided that your personal needs and goals are more important than those of all others. Misusing information for personal gain is sometimes called fraud, lying, swindling, conning, and deception or deceit. Consistently and knowingly engaging in this behavior begins to look like criminal intent.

By asking if what you are sharing is necessary, you are considering if it is useful to improve the situation, relationship, or tone of the encounter. Is it important to contribute to the dialogue? Is it a perspective that needs to be said? Or is it simply a jab? This requires that you “read the room”. There are lots of things that can be said. Not all of them need to be said all at once. If you have ever been with preschool age children and you mention any topic, all of them talk at once to share their perspective. “I ate an apple once……My grandma has apples….. I saw an apple on the ground……apples taste yucky……apple is my cousins name….apple is a computer. My daddy says bad words to apple…..” Social media works the same. Because it is not a direct exchange to a specific audience and has few boundaries in time or space, it is very hard to “read the room” for context. It is up to each person to determine what is necessary/helpful both as the writer and as the reader. Lack of context and community often cause a mismatch. This is especially true as communities become more polarized. It is helpful to give some grace and consider how it was helpful to the writer or a specific community (even if it outside your norm).

Finally, if you have determined your words are true and they are necessary/useful, you have to now ask yourself if they are kind. What you say is often less of a problem than how you say it. Nothing we say should ever take away the dignity of our fellow human beings. Disagreeing is not unkind. Civil discourse requires the examination of competing ideas. Unkind words are easy to spot when it is name calling, insults, belittling abilities, demonizing, or personal attacks. Unkind can also be gossip or the spreading malicious rumors (which intersects with truth). Unkind can be making overtly judgmental statements about another person’s choices or actions. You can be unkind by using a harsh or rough tone when speaking, even if the words themselves seem neutral.

Free speech is vital to a free people. As a citizen I will defend free speech with my last breath. Even if I disagree with you. I will also commit to practicing the three gates of truth, necessity/helpfulness, and kindness as an act of citizenship. I can only hope you will do the same. It is our democracy ….if we can keep it.