A major problem with our politicians today is that they will only accept agreement. Any disagreement is taken as an aggressive act of an enemy and is met in kind. No one is listening to the argument, instead they are posturing for battle.
This is true among different interest groups as well. Pro-Choice v Prolife does not try to create a platform for debate and dialog but rathe draw lines of battle. Each side seeks accepts only agreement with their ideals - no disagreement allowed. Neither side seeks to increase understanding, only to increase the rhetoric.
Even among individuals today there is a lack of true dialog as agreement is insisted on to be counted as a friend, any dissimilar thinking is considered an act of treason. Discourse and dialog are reduced to a bi-lateral monologue. It is no wonder we are becoming a nation of the uninformed as we only want to hear what we already believe.
In the church we too often find the same insistence on agreement over clarity. We don't want someone to clarify their position or belief,mew want them to agree with our beliefs. To disagree is to draw a line of seperation.
How sad and how foolish. A national, individual or religious discourse and dialog that presents variant ideas is not a threat but rather an opportunity. It is an opportunity to clarify your beliefs and to have clarity of another's so that informed decisions and positions can be reached. We forget the biblical truth that "As iron sharpens iron, so one person sharpens another" (Prov 27:17).
We need to seek understand more than agreement as there might be common ground on which we both can stand that is more tenable than either side's original position. Clarity allows room for growth and it gives rise to truth whether in your position or in the ideals of the other. Either way is better than blind agreement. Jus' Sayn.
No comments:
Post a Comment