Nature vs. Nurture

Why can't we all just get along?

There's a simple question with an elusive answer.

It seems that whether it's men vs. women, conservatives vs. liberals, blacks vs. whites, jews vs. arabs, protestants vs. catholics, north vs. south; it almost seems like we're programmed for conflict.

Personally, I hate conflict, and admit to going to great lengths to avoid a fight. In many areas of dispute, if I get the opportunity to truly understand where both sides of the argument are coming from, I can often understand both sides even though my agreement is with only one. But there are some issues I have to admit I have absolutely no understanding of the argument opposite of my own. Usually in those issues I study the opposing argument and find no intelligent or logical basis.

Some examples -

Partial Birth Abortion. Those who think this procedure should continue to be protected must be terribly mis-informed or just callous. Why kill a baby that would be perfectly viable and healthy right before it's delivered, then pretend like that was just abortion and not murder simply because the baby was killed before it emerged from its mother?

What women want (from men). The eternal mystery for men. These days I think I almost understand, but the dilemma is that it may be impossible to meet the expectations of a woman. Maybe we could for awhile, but we would end up bitter, frustrated, and unhappy. And that in itself would make us fail. So we guys can try all we want, but I'm afraid we'll never quite measure up to a woman's image of the perfect man. Somebody once said that for women, the only perfect men are gay. That's a confusing thought.

Supreme Court Nomination Fights. So only a day after Bush named his choice for the Supreme Court, after the previous nominee quit, a huge fight seems to have already started. Apparently, even though the new nominee (Alito) is deemed to be well qualified for the job and was unanimously approved for his current judicial position by the same Senate, Democrats will use every procedural device they can to stop him from becoming a Supreme Court justice.

Affirmative Action. How giving preferential treatment to wealthy and middle-class students for entry into prestigious graduate schools just because they are black escapes me. Why give preferences to black students, when hispanics and asians and even non-native blacks don't seem to need the help? If we want to help elevate the disadvantaged, why not be color blind and offer a few preferred spots to applicants from economically deprived backgrounds?

Christian Paranoia. The liberal atheist crowd exhibits an astounding paranoia toward what they call the "Religious Right". Their apocalyptic hysterical rhetoric against Christians suggests that people who attend church and believe in Jesus Christ are worse than Islamic terrorists. How is it so terrible that people of faith exercise their rights to speak out on moral issues like abortion, homosexuality and pornography? It's bizarre to me that a huge portion of our population only see evil in those who would try to speak out against real evil.

Government as Mommy and Daddy. The liberal idea that the primary role of government is to take care of all citizens puzzles me. Did giving away free housing, food stamps, and checks to single mothers solve any problems with poverty? No, it created an entire permanent welfare underclass, while incenting young mothers to avoid marriage in order to keep their benefits. How can those who built the "projects" and whole welfare system get away with suggesting it was a success? For those who really need help, their first option should be the rest of us - churches, service clubs, etc., where they can get help finding a job, feeding and housing their families, getting back on their feet. People in the local communities are the best source of real help for the poor. My experiences as a volunteer in social services has proven to me that the absolute worst thing you can do to a poor person is give them a check. Rather, they need a boost and incentives toward self-sufficiency, not encouragement to be a freeloader.

The loss of integrity. It seems that the truth is no longer a matter of honor in our country. We can't even get the truth from the news media anymore, because they get so attached to their favored political party that they help spread spin and lies, or at least report opinion and spin as fact. Business people used to be able to work on a handshake and a verbal promise. Now, both verbal and written contracts are routinely violated whenever a businessperson believes they can gain an advantage.

One thing that is nearly impossible is finding common ground with a Bush-hating anti-war liberal. If someone wanted to make a reasonable argument that the war in Iraq was a bad idea because it's going to be very difficult to establish a stable democracy in the hotbed of Islamic radicalism, and that the various factions in Iraq will never allow a democratic government to take hold, I can listen and understand their position. I think it's a moot argument, since we're already committed to supporting a new Iraqi democracy; but I can accept it as a well-reasoned and logical argument.

But when I encounter a Michael Moore/Cindy Sheehan type, who goes on and on about the "illegal" war, Bush lying about WMD, its all about making Halliburton and the oil companies rich, ad nauseum, there is no chance for mutual understanding. Their entire world view relies on emotion and propaganda, and facts don't matter. I sort of pity them, because they don't seem to have the intellectual capacity to seek out the facts and put aside preconceptions and emotions long enough to at least form a reasoned opinion.