>>Context, schmontext. You said that he was always civil in addressing people he felt were wrong. I'm asking how telling people that they are personally responsible for the destruction of the towers and the deaths of thousands, is being 'civil' to them.
>
>Civility has to do with whether you get in someone's face or not. He didn't throw stuff at them, like many of the libs do when someone on the right says something they don't like. He didn't use profanity like many of the liberals do - when someone says something they don't like. He disagreed with their perspective and agenda, but he did it in a civil manner. He was courteous, even though he derided their actions. I guess, since he didn't kiss the ring of the gays, you think he was uncivil toward them. I disagree. You don't have to agree with someone to be civil. Maybe you think a Baptist minister should be supportive of gays, pagans, etc. I think not!

I don't care if he is 'unsupportive'. But telling the whole world that gays are to blame for the towers and the deaths, afaic, is hate mongering. That is not 'civil' by any definition of which I'm aware.