Bridging the Gap

"I am about this close to deleting my Facebook page."

Imagine my fingers almost completely pinched together as I tell my boss that I am tired of political rhetoric on Facebook.  It's only January and already the guns are blazing, the insipid and anger provoking comments are being bandied about like a ping-pong ball and already no one is listening, just talking.

There is constant talk about the failure of our country and the failure of the government.  There is constant talk about how nothing is getting accomplished and no one is getting anything done, and there are promises of change.  But answer me this, how is our government supposed to operate and get things done when no one is willing to bridge the gap?

As soon as someone behaves reasonably by saying, "I see where you are coming from, yeah, lets work together to make this a feasible law."  Everyone is against them.

Let's look at global warming as an example.  The two sides stand firmly in opposition, having lost all scientific basis and digging in and fighting for something that no longer exists.  Studies clearly show that the rate of carbon dioxide increase in the atmosphere is higher than it has ever been.  But there is also data that is known to have been fabricated in order to further the cause.  The opposition to the idea of global warming stand unwilling to accept that there is a problem.  And the proponents of global warming stand unwilling to admit that there has been some messing with the data. 

We the people have taught them that crossing the divide is something that is unacceptable.  We tell them, "If you back down and make concessions we don't want you to be in office.  You must stand true to our unreasonable value system.  No treaty with the enemy."

I see this in discussions of religion all the time.  At one time I was having a really nice video interchange with several atheists, where I presented a more moderate approach to religion, Christianity in particular.  It was ruined by the people who refused to allow for any moderation between factions.  I was treated poorly by the Christians and the Atheists alike.  I was called all kinds of names, told I was going to Hell, told I was just as stupid as any other believer, and according to some, the main reason for the problem.  If people like me didn't exist, then no one would believe in God because there would be no one to say that the fundamentalist point of view was acceptable.  Eventually, I guess, the Atheists believe they could convince the Fundamentalist using logic.


Personally, I believe that respect is necessary for existence.  I don't have to think the way you do, but if you treat me with respect, I have far less interest in beating the snot out of you.


My position as moderate, as far as religion goes, is that I have respect for any system of belief.  If you walk your talk, I will respect your system of belief.  That doesn't mean that I think it is right, or that you have the ONLY answer to morality or that you have the answers to unlocking the secrets of God.  But I will treat you with respect and in your home pay attention to and be aware of the fact that I might think differently, but that you are on your path, while I am on mine.  I will not judge you for traditions I find unusual.  I might not participate in things that are opposed to my moral code or the moral code of the path that I am on, but I will kindly refrain without judgment, just a statement that I cannot participate.  I will expect that you will treat me and my system of belief with the same respect.


Obama talked about bringing change to the White House.  And I believe he tried.  But no matter which direction he turned he screwed himself because no one wanted someone who would bridge the gap.  The left wanted him on their side.  The right wanted him crucified.  And when he tried to walk a path that bridged the two warring factions, he was slaughtered by everyone.  No one is happy, because they aren't getting everything they want.  Compromise is just NOT allowed.


When did compromise become a dirty word?  At what point in time did we decide that we just couldn't give anymore?


Sure, sometimes it feels like I am giving more than the other side.  Sometimes it feels like they are always winning and I am always losing.  But what about how they feel?  Am I actually listening to how they feel?  Have I actually stepped outside of myself and looked at it from their perspective?  Can I?


It is easy to place blame on someone else for things that go wrong.  It is easy to say, that the argument could have been prevented if he has just seen my side.  It's easy to say, we never would have gotten stuck here if she had gotten gas when I mentioned that it looked like the tank was on empty.  It's easy to say, she knows that is just a joke, I don't need to apologize for hurting her feelings.  It's easy to say, my way is the right way, and everyone else is just wrong.


Perhaps my way is the right way for me personally, but it isn't the right way for the majority of the people.  At what point in time is the life of the one more valuable than the life of the many?  At what point in time is better to bridge the gap rather than try to make the gap wider?