The End of Our Republic?

What an adversarial people we have become, at least as it appears in the media. Both the formal media, like news networks, and the informal media, like the various varieties of social media, are constantly presenting one side or another (or both sides) of an argument. To quote an old friend, “It makes me tired.” It doesn’t have to be that way.

There are people closely watching every expression of an opinion or statement of fact, waiting for something they can characterize as something awful. My hope for each of you is that you are a member of some group that doesn’t treat you that way. I pray that each of you has some people in your life that will truly listen with interest to what you have to say and will offer an alternative way of looking at something without putting you down or making you look or feel stupid.

I am sure the near-by date of the national elections plays a large part. Each side seems to be looking for the other side to say or do something they can cast as evil. The local ads are in some ways worse than the national ones. If you have been paying any attention to local politics, I am sure you can spot some of the ads that are taking actions that were well intended by the other person and presenting them as a total betrayal of the constituency.

It is more on my mind, I am sure, because we have just recently started watching the local news on TV and it is interspersed with election ads. When I wasn’t seeing it, I wasn’t as concerned. I am sure there is a good sermon in there somewhere.

The title of this post comes from some of the current national political commentary. “The other side, if elected, will bring an end to our republic.”  Both sides are saying or implying such. They are trying to outdo each other with who can use the most hyperbolic rhetoric to characterize the other guys.

I like one side better than the other, but the other guys are not always wrong (Gasp!). The designers of our republic had at least one thing right – building in the checks and balances of the three parts of government. I think we will be here awhile yet. Despite what you might hear on the news, the American people are resilient. We will eventually come out in the right place. Meanwhile, “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called children of God.” And may God bless America! If He does, we don’t need to worry about all these politicians.

At the Risk of Being Redundant

When is the last time you disagreed with someone? Are you ever around anyone who has different ideas from yours? Do you work in a place where politics and religion are off base, where you just do not discuss anything that could lead to disagreement? Do you see disagreement as a bad thing? Had you rather appear to agree with something that you really disagree with than to enter a discussion of the disagreement? It might be time to rethink your interactions.

As our country has become more polarized, people have gone to their respective corners in the discussion arena and hunkered down. We often do not want to carry on a discussion or even talk with folks with whom we know we will have a conflict. We may avoid the topics or even avoid the people.

But in that circumstance how will we ever come to peace? We are not able even to “agree to disagree” without a discussion of the issues. Those of us who avoid disagreeable discussions may do so because we believe our opinions are so right and anyone who holds any other opinion is so solidly wrong that there is no point in discussion. That smacks of arrogance.  If we are going to live together in peace, we need to learn how to really listen to each other and try to understand what the other person is thinking.

 

Possible? Plausible? Probable?

 

 

There is some weird thinking going on around us and a lot of it is being passed on to us through conversation. Well, at least for some of us.

If you don’t hear any of it, it might be because you are just not around anyone who thinks differently from you. And if I may, I would suggest you make some new friends. But that is a topic for another day.

If someone, let’s call her Georgia, presents an idea that you instinctively do not like, your instincts may be right. But before you reject it outright ask yourself these three questions:

1.   Is it possible? Is there any scientific reason that the idea could not be true? If it is not possible, then carefully and gently present the evidence to Georgia. If it is possible, then you owe it to Georgia to hear her out. Once you have settled that it is possible, you ask yourself the next question.

2.   Is it plausible? Maybe yes, maybe no. So, this is an argument that could go either way. Assuming your counter argument is likewise plausible, it is time for a sensible discussion, a comparison of evidences.

3.   Is it probable? This is when it passes the 50/50 point. The chance is greater than half that it is true. If you still believe Georgia is wrong, you need to listen to her case anyway. Accept the fact that you might just be wrong.

But here is the most important point. Go into the discussion and come out of it with a conviction that you and Georgia can still be friends. Let’s lose this idea that people who disagree about anything significant can’t be friends. I am not sure where that came from, but it is destructive to our society. And if you are serious about convincing someone of something, you have lost your opportunity to continue your persuasion. 

Reference: Koukl: Tactics