I have been accused (and accused, and accused some more) of being arrogant. So, I think it’s important that everyone here realize something about me.
I have always despised writers or speakers who stubbornly put outrageous thoughts forward, even though those thoughts are easily dissected and found to be wanting. Therefore, it has been an ongoing self-corrective exercise for me to check my information two, three, even five times before putting it “out there.”
An example. This past Sunday evening, my wife and I went to a religion/politics discussion group hosted by friends of ours. There was a pretty good turnout, and everyone was cordial until the topic of abortion came up.
The facilitator of the group read a statement from the Catholic Church that said it was unsound practice to vote for a candidate solely on the basis of their stand on abortion. Then, my wife added that statistics show that abortions have been lower during Democratic presidencies, which caused several of the participants to go into seizures. One critic in particular said that the statistics were wrong and questioned my credibility. (The statistics are here if you’re interested. Note the Clinton years. Also note that this is a pro-life website).
Now, the argument was not and is not that Clinton stopped abortions. The argument was and is whether or not stronger, more effective social policies have a greater impact on reducing abortion than protests and electing presidents on the assumption that they might appoint a pro-life judge to the Supreme Court.
But, the bigger issue here is that healthy debate works for me. I realize that a lot of people get intimidated by debate (one couple stormed out the other night).
But, here’s the thing. I stayed, and I heard viewpoints that I disagree with. It’s been two days now, and I’m still pondering those things I heard and doing some research. Essentially, what I’m doing is checking my views and then re-checking them.
And that’s what you need to know. Though I may seem arrogant, I’m not. I’m confident that I have assessed my viewpoint to a degree that gives me the security to posit my view to others. When I hear new information that contradicts my views, I analyze that information, going through the whole check and re-check process, until I’m convinced that I am comfortable with my stand.
Debate is good. Discourse built this country. We do not have to agree with one another to be patriotic or good citizens. We do need, however, more people who are not intimidated by the views of others and who can measure what is told to them and check it against credible sources, forming a solid opinion of one’s own – not an opinion handed them by their parents, spouses, pastors or popes.
One more thing. If I seem passionate, it’s because I feel like I’m standing on the deck of the Titanic with the water coming up over my shoes. I’m screaming at people to get the hell off the ship, but about 50% of them are saying that we need to trust the captain, he’ll keep us afloat. In this analogy, everyone who stays on board dies. Passion saves lives.
I have always despised writers or speakers who stubbornly put outrageous thoughts forward, even though those thoughts are easily dissected and found to be wanting. Therefore, it has been an ongoing self-corrective exercise for me to check my information two, three, even five times before putting it “out there.”
An example. This past Sunday evening, my wife and I went to a religion/politics discussion group hosted by friends of ours. There was a pretty good turnout, and everyone was cordial until the topic of abortion came up.
The facilitator of the group read a statement from the Catholic Church that said it was unsound practice to vote for a candidate solely on the basis of their stand on abortion. Then, my wife added that statistics show that abortions have been lower during Democratic presidencies, which caused several of the participants to go into seizures. One critic in particular said that the statistics were wrong and questioned my credibility. (The statistics are here if you’re interested. Note the Clinton years. Also note that this is a pro-life website).
Now, the argument was not and is not that Clinton stopped abortions. The argument was and is whether or not stronger, more effective social policies have a greater impact on reducing abortion than protests and electing presidents on the assumption that they might appoint a pro-life judge to the Supreme Court.
But, the bigger issue here is that healthy debate works for me. I realize that a lot of people get intimidated by debate (one couple stormed out the other night).
But, here’s the thing. I stayed, and I heard viewpoints that I disagree with. It’s been two days now, and I’m still pondering those things I heard and doing some research. Essentially, what I’m doing is checking my views and then re-checking them.
And that’s what you need to know. Though I may seem arrogant, I’m not. I’m confident that I have assessed my viewpoint to a degree that gives me the security to posit my view to others. When I hear new information that contradicts my views, I analyze that information, going through the whole check and re-check process, until I’m convinced that I am comfortable with my stand.
Debate is good. Discourse built this country. We do not have to agree with one another to be patriotic or good citizens. We do need, however, more people who are not intimidated by the views of others and who can measure what is told to them and check it against credible sources, forming a solid opinion of one’s own – not an opinion handed them by their parents, spouses, pastors or popes.
One more thing. If I seem passionate, it’s because I feel like I’m standing on the deck of the Titanic with the water coming up over my shoes. I’m screaming at people to get the hell off the ship, but about 50% of them are saying that we need to trust the captain, he’ll keep us afloat. In this analogy, everyone who stays on board dies. Passion saves lives.
Comments