See, here's where we disagree:

Quote Originally Posted by Mr. E View Post
You can't just generalize and place sweeping blame due to misinterpretation and bad processing of stimuli unless your argument is that no religious or political stimuli should exist, since anything can be misinterpreted by a perverse enough mind.
Well, obviously I'm not saying there should be no political or religious stimuli. That is a world impossible to imagine. I agree that anything can be misinterpreted or twisted by a perverse enough mind -- that is an unfortunate truth of crazy. I'm saying that when statements don't require misinterpretation or twisting, they're problematic. Passages inciting violence in the Qu'ran (/Bible/whatever holy book) are foul and disgusting, and because they exist, religous leaders have a responsibility to combat and speak out against the actual violence committed from their compulsion. Statements directly encouraging violence against individuals in the world of politics, such as the ones made by Palin, Angle, Romney (though on a different issue), Limbaugh (actually pretty much everything he has to say), et al, are abhorrent, and when violence is committed that can be linked to them, they need to accept responsibility. "Don't retreat -- reload!" is more than a play of words, whether that's how Palin meant them or not. Gun-sights over oppositional politicians should not be accepted by the public, or the opposition, or their own party. When a member of a party publicly encourages violence, whether violence happens or not, the party has a responsibility to decry it publicly and vociferously.

(Just again, I want to stress that we are talking in hypotheticals, whenever I refer to "acts of violence".)

Also, I'm not sure what I think are the ramifications of this are. I'm not sure if I think that kind of speech should be against the law (from public officials, not Joe Nasty or Fred Professional Comedian), so I'm not making a case that it should. All I'm saying is that, when groups officially endorse statements directly encouraging violence, they are morally culpable for the people who act accordingly. They didn't pull the trigger, but they handed the gunman his weapon.