AR – Page 81 – intramuralist ™

03/05/201703/05/2017

limiting my own perspective

I’m thinking I won’t be venturing out on too much of a rhetorical limb here when I suggest current political discussions have become fairly difficult — at least difficult in navigating through via an interactive, respectful, honoring-of-all kind of way.

I witness such weekly within a few online groups I belong to, in which politics and various socio-economic issues are intentionally discussed.

We often struggle with respectful dialogue. We often also disagree as to why.

This week, for example, a respected friend started a conversation with the following:

“It remains amazing to me how there are millions of people that love this country and want what’s best for it. Yet somehow they are willing to simply shrug off the exploding volume of evidence…”

As the thread continued with multiple participants, it seemed amply one-sided, affirming the perspective of the conversation’s initiator. The opinions stated were also pretty strong. Please note: there is zero problem with that; many of us have strong opinions — and it’s ok to share them. There were also no insults, disparaging treatment or direct attacks, nor anyone believing it was ok to add “you idiot” at the end of their individual expression.

At one point, however, my friend asked where I was…

“AR… Nothing to say in response to the original post? Do you agree? Disagree?”

My friend sincerely wondered what I thought.

And so I chimed in…

“Your original post gave me the impression that you were starting a discussion from a point of telling everyone else how wrong they are, if they don’t have your perspective. With the far majority of persons sharing such strong opinions, that is where many of these threads seem to start… I find many of these threads not interested in interactive, varied, balanced, and respectful dialogue. Hence, it’s easier not to engage than be immediately told why I’m wrong and why there’s no validity behind my perspective.”

He then asked a brilliant question…

“As long as your mindset is as you described, and therefore you choose to avoid comment or participation, how can anyone even know what your perspective is or tell you that you are wrong?”

He was right. How can anyone know what we think if we choose not to tell them?

I added…

“That is an excellent question. And you’re right. No one can tell what my perspective is if I choose not to share it. My impression — and it may be wrong — is that most of us don’t listen long enough nor intently enough to truly understand why another person has the perspective that they do. And that’s a problem on all sides of the aisle… in Washington… on Facebook… here…”

Again, my friend sincerely wondered how I thought and desired my participation. Yet the interaction made me question the impression each of us offers to unspoken others — and how inviting we are to all. It made me wonder…

Are we allowing and promoting environments which clearly welcome diverse opinion?

Are we giving the impression that we will or will not listen intently to others?

And…

Are we limiting our own growth and perspective, by only listening intently to the likeminded?

Respectfully… always…
AR

03/02/2017

best friends for a day…

[This is a tough day for the Intramuralist. But this post originally published in January of 2016 makes me feel a little better, as it’s one of my all time favorites. I apologize for the repeat; however, some stories are worth sharing far more than once…]

_____

A little less than a year ago, I had one of the best worst weeks of my life… as nothing prepares you for the passing of a loved one. Nothing. The only thing that makes the unbearable pain bearable is a faith that is grounded in wisdom and hope — and speaks of something greater than the circumstances at hand.

My younger sister passed away early that Monday morning. My family and I had long planned to fly to NYC on Thursday, as my teenage son and his talented show choir were set to dance on the prestigious, Lincoln Center stage on Friday. Hence, the celebration of Nicole’s life was moved to Sunday, which meant much travel (and even more emotion) packed into a few short days.

Unfortunately that Thursday morning, the undesired occurred again; in our midwest city of often sporadic weather, we were experiencing a blizzard-like storm that included over 9” of snow. Perhaps minor for our friends in Boston and Colorado Springs, 9” can be paralyzing in Cincinnati.

With the storm extending across the entire East coast, flights were being cancelled by the minute; one by one, we would hear disheartening news of another show choir family unable to make this once-in-a-lifetime trip. For some odd reason, our morning flight took off, relatively on time.

Save for my grieving heart, the flight itself was fairly smooth — that is, until we approached LaGuardia. We were immediately placed into an hour long holding pattern, as the airport had closed in order to plow the runways. Unbeknownst to us at the time, after that hour, the airport had actually reopened, but the first Delta flight attempting to land skidded right off the runway, crashed through a fence, and came to rest with the plane’s nose extending out over the adjacent bay of water. Thank God no life-threatening injuries occurred.

Needless to say, our Delta flight was then told the airport was closed. With the storm intensifying and more airports closing, we wondered if they would return us home. After more delay, we were told we would be landing at Bradley International — although most of us knew not where that was.

Once landed (in Hartford, CT, no less), we found ourselves in a sea of stranded others… so many questions and confusion. Airline reps attempted to be clear; maybe busses would come; maybe they could get us to our desired destination sometime today. There were too many “maybes.”

Yet there amidst the hundreds stranded, we were given a blessed gift. Three other show choir families were experiencing the same flight and plight: two sets of parents, one set of grandparents. We recognized one another, but previous to this moment, I did not know them well. We huddled, put our minds together, assessing our options.  Deciding to take things into our own hands, we walked and talked. As a group, we shared all this unexpected, significant emotion… the challenge of being diverted… the fear of being stuck… the concern for our friends traveling alternate routes… the empathy for our friends no longer able to come… and the worry for our kids, who were separately en route. There was so much deep, dichotomous emotion — almost too much to handle.

“Too much to handle” for me was all this on top of what had happened earlier in my week. Thus, thrust together in Connecticut — feeling simultaneously totally overwhelmed and profoundly grateful — I couldn’t help but share the more prevalent feelings permeating my heart, that which happened before we ever took off. The way those men and women then reacted to the news of my sister’s death was beautiful… the tears in the women’s eyes… the immediate hugs… the questions, the sincerity, and the genuine concern… They loved this then semi-stranger in a way that was meaningful, authentic, and true. Any differences did not matter. They became, as I like to say, my best friends for a day.

Several hours later, we finally made it to Manhattan. The time included multiple phone calls, prayers, selfies in the abandoned baggage claim area, a drink in the pub, and then a two/three hour, at-times-treacherous but fun-filled van ride before pulling into Times Square near 5:30 p.m. As we each exited the van, saying “see you tomorrow,” we hugged one another, unspeakably aware of all the emotion the day entailed. Those friends will always be uniquely, deeply dear to me — what a beautiful role they serve… my “best friends for a day.”

Respectfully… with peace, joy… tears, too…
AR

02/28/2017

state of the government ’17

For the last several years, the Intramuralist has published our annual “State of the Government” analysis in conjunction with the president’s annual State of the Union Address. Technically, tonight is not a State of the Union Address.

Pres. Trump is not bucking tradition; SOTU speeches are typically not offered until a sitting president has been in office for at least one year. It is then billed as a reflection of what they’ve done and a look forward at what’s next to do.   So while the President’s speech is instead being called an “address to a joint session” this evening, the Intramuralist would like to proceed with our annual State of the Government analysis…

As repeatedly opined for several years now, the state of our government is “too partisan, too influenced by money, too big, too financially imbalanced, and too far removed from the Constitution.” With a pulse, too, of our current culture, let’s again focus on one embedded angle in that analysis which has become increasingly pronounced. One may remember it’s the singular angle that Pres. Obama acknowledged in his final SOTU last January as a “regret” of his tenure. Obama shared, “The rancor and suspicion between the parties has gotten worse instead of better.”

Exactly.

Too much rancor. Too much division. And too many fueling the division.

Part of the problem with the division seems to be that most of us like to blame anyone other than self. We are not very good at taking a tough look at ourselves, honestly reflecting upon how we individually contribute to the problem. Let’s be clear: the division is a problem… and we are far more comfortable pointing the finger elsewhere.

We point the finger at someone else’s…

Arrogance
Insults
Obstruction
Blindspots
Unwillingness to listen
And their lack of loving all people well.

We fail to look at our own…

Arrogance
Insults
Obstruction
Blindspots
Unwillingness to listen
And our lack of loving all people well.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again… if we’re only loving and respecting the person who thinks like we do, then we are only loving and respecting some people well.

When we fail to love and respect all people, we are adding to the division.

In last year’s SOTG address, the Intramuralist shared our earnest, impractical desire to wave some unifying magic wand that could somehow end this growing, disturbing digression; that would no doubt be easiest. But perhaps the best place to start is not with any magic nor fictional tool or exercise that relies on something or someone else.

The best place to start is within each individual — putting away our pointing fingers and looking instead, inside of self.

How have I fueled the division?

Tough question. Tougher answer… albeit necessary.

Respectfully…
AR

02/26/201702/26/2017

freedom of the press infringement

In the polarized, political hot bed many seem to be lying in, the following story got the attention of many this weekend. As reported by Reuters:

“The White House excluded several major U.S. news organizations, including some it has openly criticized, from an off-camera briefing held by the White House press secretary on Friday, representatives of the organizations said.

Reporters for CNN, The New York Times, Politico, The Los Angeles Times and BuzzFeed were not allowed into the session in the office of press secretary Sean Spicer.

Spicer’s off-camera briefing, or ‘gaggle,’ replaced the usual televised daily news briefing on Friday in the White House briefing room. He did not say why those particular news organizations were excluded, a decision which drew strong protests…

Spicer’s decision drew a sharp response from some of the media outlets that were excluded.
‘Nothing like this has ever happened at the White House in our long history of covering multiple administrations of different parties,’ Dean Baquet, executive editor of The New York Times, said in a statement.

‘We strongly protest the exclusion of The New York Times and the other news organizations. Free media access to a transparent government is obviously of crucial national interest.’ “

The intentional omission of the press has troubling First Amendment implications. I feel that today. I felt it also in 2009…

As reported by Judicial Watch, eight years ago:

“Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, announced today that it has uncovered documents from the Obama Department of Treasury showing that the Obama administration, contrary to its repeated denials, attempted to exclude the Fox News Channel (FNC) from a round of interviews with Treasury’s ‘Executive Pay Czar’ Kenneth Feinberg. The documents, which include email exchanges within the Department of the Treasury and between Treasury and White House staff, also provide colorful evidence of an anti-Fox News bias within the Obama White House.

The documents, obtained last week by Judicial Watch pursuant to an October, 28, 2009, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, concern a series of interviews with Feinberg, who served as the Special Master for the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) Executive Compensation, on October 22, 2009, organized by the Treasury Department. According to press reports, the Fox News Channel was specifically excluded from joining the pool of reporters which precipitated a backlash among the networks and a reversal by the Obama Treasury Department…

Regarding general anti-FNC bias within the Obama White House in an October 23, 2009, email exchange between Jennifer Psaki, Deputy White House Communications Director and [Asst. Sec. for Public Affairs in the Treas. Dept., Jenni] LeCompte, Psaki writes, ‘I am putting some dead fish in the fox cubby – just cause’. In an email on the night of October 22, 2009, commenting on a report by Fox News Channel anchor Bret Baier noting the exclusion of the network from the pool, Psaki writes to LeCompte and fellow White House colleagues, ‘…brett baier just did a stupid piece on it — but he is a lunatic’.

Deputy White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest bluntly described the White House’s position on Fox News Channel in an October 23, 2009, email to LeCompte: ‘We’ve demonstrated our willingness and ability to exclude Fox News from significant interviews…’”

Personally, with all due respect, I believe the press should have equal access to our government officials, regardless of proven or perceived bias. I also believe our outrage (or lack of it) should be equal, regardless of administration.

Respectfully…
AR

02/23/2017

ragamuffins, judgment, & searching for more

He was born Richard Francis Xavier Manning, born in 1934, passing away almost four years ago.

According to his widely publicized obituary…

“Brennan was born and raised in Brooklyn, New York. After attending St. John’s University for two years, he enlisted in the U.S. Marine Corps, serving overseas as a sports writer for the U.S. Marine Corps newspaper. Upon his return, Brennan began a program in journalism at the University of Missouri. He departed after a semester, restlessly searching for something ‘more’ in life. ‘Maybe the something ‘more’ is God,’ an adviser suggested, triggering Brennan’s enrollment at Saint Francis Catholic seminary in Loretto, Pennsylvania.”

Manning — more commonly known as Brennan Manning to his loyal legions of followers and fans — seemed to find that “more.”

He left the Franciscans in the late sixties, joining the Little Brothers of Jesus of Charles de Foucauld, a religious order committed to an “uncloistered, meditative life among the poor.”

According to Wikipedia’s bio: “Manning transported water via donkey, worked as a mason’s assistant and a dishwasher in France, was imprisoned (by choice) in Switzerland, and spent six months in a remote cave somewhere in the Zaragoza desert. In the 1970s, Manning returned to the United States and began writing after confronting his alcoholism.”

By all accounts, Manning was a humbled, faithful man. He began writing… and writing.

He wrote many books, with his most popular being the bestselling The Ragamuffin Gospel, originally published in 1990.

There’s so much in The Ragamuffin Gospel that appealed to me then… and so much I find relevant still now…

“The Ragamuffin Gospel: Good News for the Bedraggled, Beat-Up, and Burnt Out…”

(… sometimes I indeed feel all of the above…)

“… In effect, Jesus says the kingdom of His Father is not a sub-division for the self-righteous nor for those who feel they possess the state secret of salvation. The kingdom is not an exclusive, well-trimmed suburb with snobbish rules about who can live there. No, it is for a larger, homelier, less self-conscious caste of people who understand they are sinners because they have experienced the yaw and pitch of moral struggle…”

(… sometimes it’s challenging to come to grips with the reality of our own moral struggles, much less anyone else’s…)

With all his wisdom, transparent sharing, and encouraging articulations, Color Green Films has actually made a movie about Manning’s life, entitled “Brennan.” The following quote is included; it’s also especially, seemingly relevant now…

“None of us has ever seen a motive. Therefore, we don’t know we can’t do anything more than suspect what inspires the action of another. For this good and valid reason, we’re told not to judge. Tragedy is that our attention centers on what people are not, rather than on what they are and who they might become.”

Read that again, friends…

… none of us has ever seen a motive…

… we can’t do anything more than suspect what inspires another…

… for this good and valid reason, we’re told not to judge.

And yet a lot of us these days — myself included — sometimes feel so capable.

Craving for more wisdom… recognizing the existence of ragamuffins…

Respectfully…
AR

02/21/2017

all good or all evil

You know the ones…

First… maybe my favorite…

He was an adventure-seeking youth…
… talented and professionally skilled.
At a young age, he was ready to leave home and lead others.
Granted, he grew up unaware of his origins, but his life changed forever, as he persevered through family tragedy.
He would then embark on an unprecedented journey. He underwent extensive training and mentoring.
He began to lead others well — a sensitive leader… unquestionably instrumental…
He also had a solid alliance. Granted, he had to battle many — and many of those came at a significant cost.
He continued, however, to persevere.
He did not shy from conflict nor temptation — and successfully overcame both.
His reputation soon became heroic.
Many even began to worship him, believing he would somehow save them. And perhaps, for some, he actually did.
He fought for the people… with the people… by the people.
He was one of us.

The second one…

He was notably different… darker, one might say… maybe a longshot.
He believe he was chosen — maybe the chosen one.
It was sometimes hard to see any heart.
In fact, some believed he was more machine than man…
… twisted and evil.
When his talents first became noticeable, he had to choose between leading for good — or leading for bad.
Power undoubtedly corrupted him.
He quit serving the people.
Thus, many were afraid of him — even those closest to him… if there was anyone close.
I would guess he had few friends. He did have children — in which we saw a glimpse of his heart — but the time was fleeting at best. He led most through intimidation and the instilling of fear.
He had no patience for opposing opinion or insubordination.
He had a distinct look to him, although his suit always seemed to augment his diminished strength and vitality.
For some reason, he seemed ever tormented inside… even if he faked it in his plethora of public interactions.

Maybe I’m wrong here, but my sense is we are so narrow in our view. We look at pundits and politicians, names and nominees — and feel justified in placing them firmly in solely one of the above two categories…

… as if one is all evil and one is all good.

But there’s a problem.

The above descriptions are fictional.

As described by “Wookiepedia: The Star Wars Wiki”, the above depicts Luke Skywalker and Darth Vader… yes, fictional characters.

Friends, we are omitting wisdom when we equate real life people and public personalities with fiction.

There is only one Luke — and only one Vader.

And neither one is real.

Respectfully…
AR

02/19/2017

the great political divide

I did a search recently on “the great political divide.” (And let me say for a mere tangent moment, it’s amazing all the things one can search for on Google…) But I was curious. What would arise?

The results were many, with first headlines as follows…

“In America Today, What Is The Real Political Divide?”
“The New Political Divide”
And “Three Ways Marketers Can Bridge Today’s Great Political Divide”

The following comments from those articles were also insightful…

“A recent PEW Research study found that half of Democrats and half of Republicans actually fear the other party…”
“For years now a majority of Americans have realized that neither of the so-called major political parties represents them.”

And perhaps the one that struck me most this day, from Lindsey Lorel, a senior ad agency strategist in Advertising Age, written three weeks ago…

“… This past election has shown us that America is struggling to find that common ground. At its worst, we’ve witnessed acts of hate. And at its most civil, we’ve seen carefully constructed judgments posted to the echoing walls of Facebook users. The nation is more divided than ever, but as any brand strategist can tell you, for every tension there’s a counter tension. The counter to division is unity, and I believe that in the coming four years, we will see a surge in brands that tell stories of togetherness…”

Friends, please pause before going forward. I have no desire to focus on all the things another person and party is doing wrong; my desire is to focus on those stories of togetherness. But right now, there’s too much finger pointing… too much “look at him” — “look what he/she is doing wrong!”…

That’s it. There’s too much focus on someone else; there is lesser focus on self or what “I” may or may not be doing wrong.

Hence, the great divide isn’t between male and female, Democrats and Republicans, or Trump supporters and Never Trumpers…

Look instead at the plethora of good thinking, wise people, who used to know it wasn’t polite, ok, respectful, or discussion-building to scream, point fingers, and tell or think of everyone else in regard to how wrong they are — those who are falling prey to ending conversation and relationships if another doesn’t feel/think/believe like them. We are falling prey to those who wish to divide. We are choosing ideology and issue over all else. We are damaging relationship.

The great political divide, therefore, isn’t between all those listed above; the great divide is within ourselves. Will we or will we not succumb to the idea that ideology is more important than relationship?

Too many groups and social media gatherings are encouraging division. And too many of us are willingly joining in… “I just can’t talk to a liberal any more… I don’t want anything to do with anyone who supports Pres. Trump.”

Yes, the divide is within ourselves.

One of the articles listed above is from an October article published on WPR.org after first broadcast on Wisconsin Public Radio. Per their site, “Wisconsin Public Radio and WPR.org welcome civil, on-topic comments and opinions that advance the discussion from all perspectives of an issue.”

Civil.
On-topic comments and opinions.
That advance the discussion.
From all perspectives.

Are we valuing all of that?

Or are we falling prey to something lesser?

Yes, the great political divide is within ourselves.

Respectfully…
AR

02/16/2017

what’s hard for one

Some things are too wonderful for me…

“Too wonderful” in the sense that as much as I try to wrap my brain around the why and the how, I still cannot offer a definitive, concrete answer…

… like how the hawk can soar, so smoothly and serenely in mid-air…
… how the leopard, lizard, or chameleon can creatively “change his spots,” so-to-speak, blending into indigenous areas…
… or how the tide rolls so swiftly in, the powerful but simultaneously delicate ebbs and flows of the ocean…

Yes, there are things too wonderful for us — things we do not totally have the answer to — and are incapable of fully describing or comprehending.

One of the things I wrestle with on a more daily basis that I have yet to totally have the answer to is why and how we continually project emotion onto other people — the why and the how in regard to our expectation that all people should somehow feel the same way about all things…

… and if they don’t, they are either wrong or something far less worthy or wise than “me.”

Allow me a brief example, if you will…

I have friends and family for whom specific holidays are hard (… truth is, there are specific days for me that are hard). For some, it’s Thanksgiving, Christmas, Hanukah, or a specific person’s birthday. This past week, it was Valentine’s Day.

For various reasons — some big, some small, but reasons specific to another person — those days are hard.

I keep wrestling with this idea of loving our neighbors well. And the more I ponder and submit to authorities more omniscient than I, the more I see how perhaps the most pragmatic means of loving our neighbor well is having compassion for others in what’s hard for them. Note that I said “them”… not for me, for someone else, nor anyone down the street.

Loving our neighbor well means being in the trenches with that neighbor, so-to-speak… walking beside them… getting into the down and the dirty… showing compassion — empathy as much as possible… and attempting to truly understand another… especially in what’s hard.

But there’s an added nugget of wisdom we tend to omit: what’s hard for them is not necessarily hard for another. And therefore, loving my neighbor well does not mean I must dismiss the legitimacy of how another responds… to the day, event, or something else.

Yes, with some in the trenches, I share tears of sadness; with others, I share tears of joy. If I am am only willing to share one set of tears, then I am only loving some neighbors well. Tears for one do not preclude tears for the other.

It thus makes little sense to me why we continue to project our emotions onto all others. What makes more sense — at least from seemingly, a perspective of wisdom — is as reasonably as possible, without sacrificing authenticity, empathetically being “all things to all people.” That means loving the one you’re with, albeit potentially through various sets of tears.   Sorry. I said this was hard.

Have you noticed the hawk soaring in mid-air lately? … how smoothly and serenely he soars?

Yes, some things are hard to totally wrap the brain around…

“Too wonderful”… yes, indeed.

Respectfully…
AR

02/14/2017

“me”

I’m tired of putting up with this!

I’m done!

I refuse to do this any longer!

No, I will not listen!

I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to going to take it any more!

With all due respect to Howard Beale — the fictional longtime anchor of the Union Broadcasting System’s UBS Evening News — and his infamous “mad as hell” movie quote from 1976, my sense is we’re hearing a lot these days of what many will no longer do…

… what they won’t do… what they refuse to do… and what they think everyone else should do, too…

I get it. There is a time to stand up, and a time to set boundaries; boundaries are healthy. And we each are entitled to discern when, where, and how to set those boundaries. The challenge is when we feel justified in setting everyone else’s boundaries, too.

Such is playing itself out within the social experiment still taking place on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, etc. The vitriol… the digression of respectful conversation… it continues to seemingly only digress because we keep attempting to set another’s boundaries!

We confront people for what they say… How dare you? How could you even think like that? You must be stupid or ignorant or not a real whatever-you-claim-to-be?!

We confront people for what they do not say… I will assume by your silence that you don’t care… that you’re not bothered… and that you totally agree with everything I do not.

Or we’re profane.

Or we’re insulting.

Or… we justify that, too.

Geeeeeesh. We are a rough crowd.

Again, there exists a place to stand up and speak out. Let me not suggest that we are to be entirely diminutive, meek people. We are not.

But there’s one element of the current vitriol that keeps popping up to me. I can’t quite shake it.

Read through the 5 quotes listed above again… starting with “I’m tired”… “I’m done”… “I refuse”… “I will not”… and “I’m mad.”

Notice the subject of each of the above?

Me.

Yes, that’s right… me.

The question I can’t shake this day — and must first and foremost evaluate my own falling prey in the process — is how much of “me” is included in our rants? Let me say this again… I am just as guilty; it’s an easy trap for each of us to fall into. How much of our rants is about “me”?

How much of “me” being tired, “me” being done, “me” refusing, being mad, etc. is the motivation for my desire to decide what everyone else needs to do, too?

Sometimes I think if we each had more patience… each were more humble… each were more gracious… then our communication would be better, developing solution would be more probable, and our relationships would remain intact…

… especially on social media.

Respectfully…
AR

02/09/2017

still makin’ me want to shout

Perhaps no one has noticed, but respectful dialogue seems to be increasingly nearing endangered species status. We seem to continuously take turns — albeit not on the Intramuralist (thank God!) — justifying why respect is no longer necessary.

Respectful dialogue is this blog’s stated priority. Regardless of society’s rhetorical digression, we will adhere to a conversation abundant with respect. We will not ignore truth; but we will also not sacrifice grace in the process.

So I wondered… what do others say about respect?

“So much drama off and online…
Be kind and respect others.
Follow the golden rule. Always.
Don’t step on others.
Chase your dreams the right way.
Keep your head up.
Then, everything else will take care of itself.”
― K.J. Kilton

“Respect begins with this attitude: ‘I acknowledge that you are a creature of extreme worth. God has endowed you with certain abilities and emotions. Therefore I respect you as a person. I will not desecrate your worth by making critical remarks about your intellect, your judgment or your logic. I will seek to understand you and grant you the freedom to think differently from the way I think and to experience emotions that I may not experience.’ Respect means that you give the other person the freedom to be an individual.” ― Gary Chapman

“Many people have the confused idea that peace will happen when all the colors in the palette are the same. The actuality of peace is accepting each color’s differences and seeing the beauty each possesses.” ― Alaric Hutchinson

There’s more…

“Keep an eye on your responses. Strong responses are about you more than them.” ― Auliq Ice

“Men are respectable only as they respect.” — Ralph Waldo Emerson

“In the end, those who demean others only disrespect themselves.” ― D.B. Harrop

And a couple more…

“To be respected, be respecting.” ― Himanshu Arora

“Respect is love in action.” ― Bangambiki Habyarimana

“The only true disability is the inability to accept and respect differences.” ― Tanya Masse

I heard a gentleman on one of the cable news networks this week discuss the current societal digression. He spoke specifically of the protest-laden, rhetorically-attacking, political climate; his evaluation was not one calling out solely the left, right, or anything in between. He was discussing the entire sad state of affairs and the current, clear inability to accept any ideological differences. There exists an incredibly prevalent “I’m-right-and-there’s-no-way-I-could-be-wrong-or-off-in-any-capacity” attitude. In other words, there is a concerning, existent lack of humility.

I then found myself sitting still, pondering more, and attempting to digest his stated perspective that “instead of talking with each other, we have started shouting at each other.”

Just for a moment, visualize a person shouting… ranting, raving.. and loud…

Can any other voice be heard?

Does anyone else feel respected?

Great question… really great question…

Respectfully…
AR