Midwinter: Part I

Today I am revisiting the title of my blog, "Midpoint Musings." I maintain that it truly is at the midpoint of most things where we can see most clearly, find common ground, and come together as a culture and as humanity.

Yesterday, creationist, Ken Ham, and Bill Nye, the Science Guy, debated Creationism versus Evolution. Although I did not listen to the entire debate, the tenants of the opposing positions are generally well-known. 

In January, the annual March for Life was held in Washington, DC, an event I've actually attended twice. The opposing arguments are also generally well-known.

Our politicians in Washington and in our respective states have had policy debates that are well-covered in the media, and we, the populations of our country and states generally understand the arguments on both sides of health care, immigration, aging, foreign policy, etc.

It is midwinter and I am a bit weary of the weather, and consequently the debates, because there really is very little that is going to convince one side to come over the other side, very little, indeed; unless of course both sides of any given position make conscious decisions and effort to seek common ground. 

There ARE things that can be agreed upon, but in our human frailty, we prefer to take some proverbial stand and miss the opportunity to make it a better world for everyone.

We really need to focus less on bolstering the debate, and more on finding the midpoint for discussion purposes and for progress.

So here are some suggestions. Maybe creationists could begin by agreeing that God also created/made possible science; maybe evolutionists could agree that we do have to take many of the unknowns in science on "faith," at least for the time being.

Maybe, people on both sides of the birth control/abortion issue could agree that women REALLY need supported before, during, and after, an unplanned pregnancy. Can we take a position that does not punish women? In other words, can pro-lifers/anti-abortionists and pro-choicers/pro-abortionists agree that it is counter-productive to withhold birth-control, that it is critical to provide pregnancy support, that it is important to face the reality of the need to provide for the children we want them to have, and ridiculous to throw a woman in jail for having an abortion (should the day come when abortion is once again illegal)?

Could our legislators put their power-drives aside and think about all the ramifications of the extreme-ness of many of their arguments? 

Debate is a wonderful thing if we do it in a spirit of finding the areas where we can agree. The lack of skill in finding middle ground damages our future and our children's future.