
These are not major problems by any means and I want to
emphatically state that to a person I enjoy a majority of our conversations and
enjoy the perspective that many bring to the table and in this case there
really is a table, the lunch table where we often engage in spirited
conversations.
The problem is, as long as I tone down my rhetoric
everything is fine and when I say tone it down I mean refuse to honestly open
up about my politics or even my religion.
On the few occasions that those topics were broached the very nature of
the conversation changed. I often sense
a drastic cooling in the room when I start to mention my personal beliefs and
on a few other occasions had I not backed off the conversation would have
turned heated, not from my end I am proud to say.
The problem is in the democratic sharing of ideas that are
to me the foundation of our great country and the only way I believe to develop
a solid foundation for alternating beliefs. But the dogmatic rhetoric within this school and
most schools is disturbing as it presents a wholly one sided view and not the preached
eclectic openness of liberalism that is espoused and supposed to helps all to
learn. It’s ok for me to sit and listen while
other spout off their likes and dislikes about this candidate or this policy
but when I interject with a more conservative view the process of democracy is
quickly stifled.
Ooh their polite and many would rather walk away then have
to confront someone who thinks differently than they do, but when a discussion
is sidelined by non participation then the process of discussion is over,
leaving every one less informed and less able to overcome the major differences
that exist in every avenue of life and work.
I am one who likes to discuss and I like to banter back and
forth with the idea that I may actually learn from the others point of view,
but the opposite is very rarely true with the others spewing their lines like
automatons programmed to respond only in a very specific and pre-planned way, with
their ears turned off so that if any divergent ideas seek audience in their
brain it can be summarily removed before any real damage can occur.
I have purposely left off all reference to my school and will
not even mention the names nor change the names to protect the innocent. The specific individuals matter little in
relation to the overriding void of openness that should exist as the educated
speak and ponder those ideas presented.
For many years I have been vocal about the issues I saw as
important. It’s easy to do as a blogger
but almost impossible to do as an educator.
If I did decide to voice my opinions almost immediately a cloud of
discord showers down the liberal line, drenching me in a diatribe of illogical
and honestly, irrationality, that stems from too many years of following the
wake of some great ship, thinking that the waves will protect if only we stay
in close proximity to those ideas, never realizing the true danger of those
waves and the easy in which they can pull you under the boat and shred you to
ribbons by the powerful propellers. The
wake of the boat increases in danger the closer you actually get to the boat. In other words, the more inline you are with
one singular thought the less able you are to accept the truths that are so
often in abundance, if one is really able to or willing to listen.
There are only a few teachers that would even entertain a
discussion of voting for the conservative or even the non democrat, most getting
visibly disturbed by the very act of breaking their life long bubble of
perception with no variance available toward consideration of another’s point
of view to ever consider the possibility of change.
Just the other day I was in a polite conversation with a
language teacher who I have talked to in the past with most of our
conversations surrounding the unconcerned areas of life and the safe areas of
politics, meaning I simply agreed and let them talk while I nodded my head to
be polite, not wanting to offend in any way.
But the conversation turned to religion and I was asked what church I
attended? My answer was direct and to
the point as I stated that I was a “Latter Day Saint” with the needed
attachment that we are also called “Mormons”.
Almost from one breath to the next the conversation went
from cordial and friendly to the other party standing up and making excuses for
having to leave and a subsequent issue of no contact with only a polite but
curt greeting in the hall. The question
arises, why would my choice of religious offend another? Do they not have that same choice and why is
it that my choice is not as valid as their choice? Does not the same logic follow all of our
choices?
I know politics and religion are two volatile subjects that
are often encouraged not to be broached but my question is why? I feel strongly about who I am and how I can
retain my understanding of myself and my fellow man though the process of self
examination and study. I enjoy learning
from others and receive great satisfaction when profitable discussions can be
achieved with the almost mandatory segregation due some illogical discord based
on inaccurate perceptions.
The problem is not just around my work room table but seems
to be a rampant issue across this great land.
We as a country have lost the ability to openly discuss and share, holding
the principles of mutual respect to guide our thoughts into learning from each
and with no overall principle of conversion from either side.
Many shed their logical skins when Mormonism is even
mentioned, feeling uncomfortable with the whole idea that as a Christ centered
Mormon I can have profound feelings for the Son of God. So often parishioners have heard the
propaganda of horns on our heads and lecherous activities within our temples
and the ideas of having multiple wives leading many to conclude that the Warren
Jeffers crowd and the LDS Church are one in the same….Not even close.
It’s not in the misunderstandings that bother me but in the
ignorant refusal to discuss our differences.
In both religion and politics the inner sanctum of ones mind often
overshadows the practical as screaming priests or politicians can be heard in
the minds of the weak telling them to ignore whatever is being said, regardless
of the truth.
It is primarily due to my belief that I seek to further my
foundations of truth. I can read,
ponder, even pray to find the truth but only when I live what I believe will
the truth of my decisions be known, for “faith has to proceed the miracles of
belief”…Spencer Kimball.
Even within politics the religious fervor of one party over
another transcends the common sense and destroys all rationality. One of the teachers asked who I was voting
for, thinking that I would have taken the Educational side and chosen either
Sanders or Hillary, When I mentioned
Trump the room went quiet before the storm of reprisal and the negative slurs
began in Ernest and unabated until I either stopped defending my life or I left
the room.
When was it OK to disregard the beliefs of one over the
beliefs of the others? When was it OK to
demand a belief prior to participating in a conversation? Do we all have to agree on everything? If I like blue and you like red does that
make me wrong or you conversely more right than me? When did this country become so rude and
inconsiderate? And when did my beliefs
create in others the need to lambaste and condemn me for those beliefs?
I will most likely continue my soft footed approach to lunch
room discussions but I will never back down when my thoughts or my beliefs are
converted to hate and revulsion from others that do not agree. Let me close with this. I am a Mormon. I believe in Christ as the Son of God. I am a Christian by all rights and would like
to remind all who disagree that the name of my Church is the Church of Jesus
Christ of Later Day Saints. What’s the
name of your church and what does that say about your devotion?
My politics are Christ centered with the overriding belief
that teaching a man to fish is ultimately the goal of any social or welfare
system. I believe in honesty and
integrity and search the candidates for those who are honest, capable and
electable. I believe in the constitution
and its divine origination.
So if you don’t agree with my stance, at least have the
maturity to agree but disagree and leave the name calling to those who are
truly ignorant.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Think before you comment....