Like many of you, I am shocked and saddened by the shootings in Arizona. It is both tragic and ironic that we celebrate Martin Luther King’s life and sacrifice shortly after another political assassination in the United States. My best wishes go out to Representative Gabrielle Giffords (Dem, AZ) and the many people victimized and affected by this act.

A few thoughts of my own.

First, in reading about this tragedy, I’ve come across a number of news stories, editorials and talk shows I’ve found particularly insightful. Paul Krugman calls out the climate of hate that nurtures violent extremism. Gail Collins reminds us that second amendment rights should not stand in the way of reasonable regulations of firearms. Timothy Egan has a nice piece on the myth of the hero gunslinger in the American west. And Tom Ashbrook of WBUR’s On Point has a set of interviews that are worth a listen. Not to be left out of the limelight, we’ve been treated to Sarah Palin arguing that she is a victim too through her ‘blood libel’ video. This was a low point for her, especially when juxtaposed with Barack Obama’s memorialization.

Second, I am nothing short of amazed at the political vitriol, violence, and easy access to military style weaponry in the States. A simple glance northward into Canada reveals a society much like ours, certainly as free personally and politically, but without the level of hate speech, political violence, and weaponry that so often punctuates American history with carnage. It is not that Canadians are any better than Americans. We are all fallible human beings. But there is a different moral and political ethos, one with a great deal more civility, respect for difference, aversion to violence, and sensible regulations on access to lethal force.

And finally, I am offended by the cheap disavowals of responsibility from those whose ratcheted rhetoric contributes to this toxic political environment. On the face of it, there seems little doubt that the perpetrator, Jared Loughner, was mentally unstable. Serious personal and medical issues played a role in his acts.

Yet many have used this man’s problems to shield themselves from criticism for establishing a moral climate in which political violence may seem justified. Commentators and politicians such as Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sharron Angle, and Sarah Palin have failed miserably at upholding ethical norms of personal reflection and democratic deliberation. I hope that in the court of public opinion and history, they will be called to account for their actions.

King deservedly holds a place in our political culture for many reasons. One was his resistance to the continued oppression of blacks, the poor, and other marginalized people in our society. Another was the ethical commitments he brought to this struggle through the practice of strategic non-violence. Most appreciations of King focus on these elements of his politics. Without diminishing their importance, I want to emphasize a third — his ethical discourse of the beloved community. Speaking in the prophetic tradition, Kings concern was not simply individual rights or a legalistic norm of due process. It was rather a vision of a community of equals in right relationship with one another. Such a relationship necessitated the use of non-violent direct action as a lever of power. Nonviolence was not simply an instrumental tool, however, but a moral choice to respect the dignity of every person and citizen. A vision of the beloved community was repeated time and again in King’s sermons, speeches, and writing. It is a vision we would all do well to remember.