Values: Jonathan talks of civility, honesty, responsibility, humanity. I'd add"humility" and I would also add"reverence for life". The very term pro-life has been co-opted by the religious right in this country. Regardless of one's views on abortion, we must take the phrase"a culture of life" (John Paul II's words) and make it our own, explaining how liberal values do foster a commitment to non-violence in every arena of society. (Of course, like many religious progressives, I am pro-life, and I don't think the subject is a closed one on the left.)
Metrics: To Jonathan's"peace, justice, quality of life, sustainability", I would add" community". Contemporary liberalism, too often falls prey to its worst tendencies of individualism, concerned with the maximization of individual rights. Quality of life needs to be measured not only in terms of how well individuals thrive, but how well social and religious groups are able to maintain their cohesion and their identity and their unique and critical role in the culture.
Methods: To Jonathan's fine list, I would add a willingness to embrace a long-term vision. We must not be committed to gains that we will make in the next five to ten years, but gains that we will make in the next century or beyond. Evangelicals with a social conscience speak of"building the kingdom". It takes time. The church has been waiting for two millenia for Christ's return, we are willing to wait (but not idly) a bit longer.
I'm glad to be here. As an Anabaptist evangelical who teaches history and gender studies at a secular college, I don't know what (beyond curiosity) I can provoke in terms of discussion. But I am committed to the notion that"believer","scholar", and"progressive" are not all mutually exclusive terms in the current dialogue.
UPDATE: I need to reiterate that I am in near-full agreement with Jonathan's terrific statement. And I do think that we need to be honest and brave about facing our obvious and important differences over the exact meaning of"reverence for life."