We all are aware that President-elect Barack Obama ran a campaign advocating that he planned to reach out to all sides if he were to be elected president.
We, or at least I, think that reaching across party lines is what needs to happen to create lasting change in our society. Look how far “W” got by not reaching out to those opposing his views, there was no middle ground with “W.”
"It is important for America to come together even though we may have disagreements on certain social issues."Obama has not changed what he said repeatedly during his campaign.
Obama went so far as to give the reminder that Pastor Rick Warren invited him to speak at his church knowing Obama disagreed with many conservative religious stances.
"That dialogue, I think is part of what my campaign has been all about," Obama added. "We're not going to agree on every single issue. What we have to do is be able to create an atmosphere where we can disagree without being disagreeable."Follow his words closely. Obama, on numerous occasions throughout his campaign created a ruckus over his statements that he would communicate with adversaries on the foreign relations front, yet his supporters then felt strongly that his willingness to do so was a good thing. Why should it be any different in this case?
Most people choose not to go near this subject, usually because they do not want to upset the applecart with their peers who have a boot planted firmly on one side or the other. Especially politicians and preachers!
It is my opinion that all people should be treated equally. I feel the plight of those who are not, as I have many close friends who are living the life that has been bestowed upon them, also, many who have struggled to grasp their own feelings. One in particular who after pushing aside his true feelings throughout his college years, married a nice women, had two children with her, sent their children off to college, then ended the “perfect” life by no longer being able to hide his true self at the age of 56. He revealed his pent up, self imposed torture, divorced his wife and has since been living with a man who his children and ex-wife have come to adore and consider a member of the family. My friend is now 72 years old, and very happy to be himself. This is but one example of millions out there.
People have felt compelled to hide their true self out of shame or fear of being unaccepted by the imposed disdain of others over centuries of time. I always wondered how a person, who opposes abortion on any condition, can at the same time support the death penalty. I have also wondered how a person who stands at the pulpit during a Sunday church service and quotes scripture - man shall not judge, yet that same person does the precise thing he warns others not to do if they are to live a Christian life. If our Declaration of Independence is to mean anything in the phrase “All men are created equal,” should that not be taken to mean - regardless of their sexual orientation?
Human rights activist have hammered away for decades over issues of race (we now have our first African-American president), gender (women now have the right to vote), disabilities protections (persons with a handicap must be considered without bias for employment), religion (religious views are not to be discriminated when considering someone for a job). There are still some uneducated among us who will argue nearly every point that was raised here. People have this uncanny ability to fear what they do not understand, then to make excuses for why they are correct in their reasoning. It’s the nature of the beast – fear that is.
How do we achieve lasting change?
By continuing to stand up for what is fair, by promoting our cause through education, by working together to create understanding, by maintaining a dialogue with those of a different mind, and just maybe by demonstrating through actions that we can reach a common ground by inviting those who oppose our views into our circle of friends.
For those of you who ask: But Warren holds contempt for gay people, why would Obama choose him out of so many other possibilities to give the Inauguration invocation? I understand your inability to agree with his choice. Yet I believe his overall intention is to build a lasting foundation that begins by paving the way in drawing others to common ground. Letting them play an active role, giving them the opportunity to get to know their adversaries, opening up the lines of communication, then just maybe making a lasting mark on one influential person that can possibly get the ball at least rolling in the right direction. That does not mean the ball may not roll off coarse occasionally, but if it continues to roll, it may well end up where it belongs.
History has shown that it takes true diplomacy to create lasting change. Not everyone will always agree with the changes, but they must live with those changes. Not everyone will always agree with another persons decision, but I honestly believe there is usually a method to the madness of a true genius.
Obama, I do not believe for a second is biting the hand that fed him. His supporters put him where he is, that said, I hold HOPE that his supporters, although they may not get his method, may in the end benefit from his madness.
One other point to ponder: There will be gay people included in the Inauguration Day Parade. Imagine Warren’s ability to overlook that announcement. He’s just thrilled to be included in the spotlight; never mind bigotry for the moment!














Comments (3)
Excellent post! There can be no political dialogue if we only listen to those who agree with us. Also, giving a voice to purveyers of injustice can be very constructive. For instance, a few days ago ABC gave the Vice President a chance to talk, and he used the chance to materially admit to clear war crimes (although he seems not to understand that they are clear war crimes). Now his interview with ABC can be read into evidence, and perhaps convict him, at a war crimes trial.
Posted by Peter Tramel
|
December 19, 2008 5:11 AM
Posted on December 19, 2008 05:11
Great post Denise and great insights. Both you and Peter are right when you say that meaningful dialogue cannot exist until you talk to people who have opposing views. And since religion and the Christian church have been a major source of homophobia, a change among Christians can only take place when Christians like Rick Warren have dialogues within the church, with liberal and gay Christians, and outside the church. I agree with you that Obama is being wise.
Posted by Angelo Lopez
|
December 19, 2008 9:05 AM
Posted on December 19, 2008 09:05
An excellent essay, Denise! I think you hit the nail on the head. Rick Warren is a long way from my favorite person in the world, but I agree that Obama's choice was an appropriate and intelligent one.
Posted by Roger Freedman
|
December 19, 2008 8:37 PM
Posted on December 19, 2008 20:37