Opinion: The United States of Absolutism: Why can’t we find a middle ground?
Few things annoy me more than when someone who doesn't know me at all tries to tell me who I am.
"You're a liberal, I'm a conservative, and there's no chance we'll ever agree on anything (I've read your columns)," a disgruntled reader recently told me in an email.
He was unhappy about what he perceived to be an imbalance of views in The Enquirer's letters to the editor in general, but specifically on the topic of Roe v. Wade. In his opinion, I was using my editorial authority to purposely exclude anti-abortion points of view because as a "liberal," I'm convinced "a conservative's opinions aren't worth printing."
This dissatisfied reader, however, conveniently ignores the letters and guest columns from conservative writers that we do print, including past ones he himself had written. I liken it to those conservative talking heads who go on various media platforms and complain about those media platforms censoring or stifling their point of view. Maybe I'm the only one who sees the oxymoron there.
Perhaps The Enquirer doesn't print as many conservative letters as this reader would prefer, but if I truly believed a "conservative's opinions aren't worth printing," why would I publish any at all? Why would The Enquirer invite alternative voices such as Gil Spencer, Christine Marallen, Mack Mariani and Rachel Citak to sit on our editorial board as community members?
This is the type of nonsensical debate we find ourselves trapped in these days in America – and it happens across the political spectrum. We make assumptions about who people are and their motives. We conveniently ignore facts and truths because they don't fit the narrative we want to believe about the "other side." We're not interested in authentic dialogue and finding common ground. We just want to be angry at each other, take cheap shots and fight incessantly. While I try to keep the faith that reasonable people can come together to form a more perfect union, I'm starting to believe that all we really want to do is topple our divided house.
The truth is, none of us are all of any one thing – conservative, liberal, good or bad. Most people are incredibly complex individuals who live in areas of gray, not black and white. But as Americans, we don't respond well to gray. American writer and activist James Baldwin once said, "We live in a complex country that insists on being simple-minded." There are no simple, easy solutions to the problems we face in our country or the world, for that matter. And people can be enigmatic. To pretend otherwise is folly.
For example, the abortion issue is incredibly complex, with a lot of cases that will continue to come up that will call for common-sense medical decisions, not absolute political positions. As the ordained pastor of a church, I am "pro-life," but I grapple with the notion of forcing a woman – and sadly in some cases, a child – who has been raped to birth the baby of her rapist. Shouldn't there be reasonable exceptions for when the mother's life is at stake or the child has serious health problems or deformities? Anyone not wrestling in their soul with these questions isn't taking the matter seriously.
Plus, we live in a democratic republic not a theocracy. So while my strong Christian convictions should drive the choices in my life and my household, do I have the right to force my religious beliefs on American Jews, Muslims, atheists or agnostics? Even God doesn't do that. Instead, God gave us one of his greatest gifts – free will, the ability to choose for ourselves.
I also support the right to bear arms. Yet I am sickened by not only the mass shootings that have made national headlines, but the almost daily shootings we see in Cincinnati. I know that background checks, bans on assault weapons and guns in the hands of teachers still won't stop a deranged individual intent on murdering others. However, I also know that we can't sit back, do nothing and watch our children and fellow Americans continue to get gunned down in schools, churches, synagogues and grocery stores.
Maybe we need to try all of it – automatic weapons bans, metal detectors, background checks, limits on ammo, teachers with guns, more school resources officers, increasing mental health services, you know the score. Anything that makes it harder to kill and saves lives. Law-abiding citizens and patriots have made sacrifices throughout our history to make our country safer for all.
And yes, the U.S. does need to get a handle on immigration. But we need to do so compassionately and fairly. We cannot welcome refugees from war-torn Ukraine with open arms while simultaneously slamming the door shut on Haitian migrants and Mexican asylum-seekers fleeing political instability, natural disasters and drug cartels. Being an American is a privilege, and those seeking to come here from other countries should have to get in line and follow the rules. But we also can't become so rigid that we fail to recognize there are times when it is appropriate, even humanitarian, to bend those rules to aid those in distress. America, a nation of immigrants, is best known for building bridges not walls.
And Black lives matter to me, too, especially mine and my loved ones. I also know that police are integral to the safety and security of our communities. If someone breaks into my home, I'm calling the police. I just don't want them to mistake me for the robber when they arrive and shoot me because I'm a Black man in a nice, mostly white, suburban neighborhood. I've said it before – I'm not anti-police, I'm anti-bad policing. And if you aren't anti-bad policing, too, the problem isn't me, it's you. Weeding out bad actors in police precincts should be just as important as ridding our streets of criminals.
Respect is a two-way street. Police deserve it for the risks they take to keep us safe, but they also need to give it. Rather than defunding the police, let's better train them to deescalate. And we wouldn't have to worry about qualified immunity if officers were more qualified to deal with diversity.
These are just some of the uncomfortable, gray areas that require each of us to have the most serious minds, the most honest of conversations, and the most open hearts, not merely spouting goofy soundbites or repeating cable TV talking points.
Perhaps our biggest flaw as a nation is our absolutism. The notion that there is only one right perspective and it belongs to my side. That smacks of hubris and will likely one day result in our nation's downfall unless we change course. Each of us must possess the humility and wisdom to understand that what we do know is vastly outstripped by what we don't know. Avoiding assumptions, keeping an open mind and being willing to listen to and consider other points of view, particularly those that diverge (sometimes wildly) from our own will be keys to mending our broken nation.
After trading a few emails and revealing some personal insights with this disgruntled reader, his tone changed.
"I appreciate that you shared this. I didn't know some of it, and it does give me a little different perspective," he conceded. "I wasn't looking for a fight. I simply get frustrated with the media (print and broadcast)…The bottom line is that I want the hometown newspaper to survive..."
Whodathunkit? Something else this "liberal" and a conservative can agree on.
It's amazing the common ground we can find when we are more interested in hearing than being heard.
Opinion and Engagement Editor Kevin S. Aldridge can be reached at kaldridge@enquirer.com. Twitter: @kevaldrid.
This article originally appeared on Cincinnati Enquirer: Opinion: The United States of Absolutism: Why can’t we find a middle ground?
