Our Great Divide

If you endeavor to read my article, please know that I am writing because I believe that pointing out the topics of obvious disagreement is a way to create dialogue. It is the dialogue that will help to shrink our great divide. Please understand that I am not trying to cause you heartache or anxiety. I am simply sharing my observations, analysis and opinions. I would appreciate your correspondence via any of the reply links that are on my website.

It’s no secret that in today’s world, the citizens of the United States are divided on nearly every political and social issue possible. It’s ironic that our nation is called the United States, yet it seems more like the Divided States of America. In a book titled, The Divided States of America, the author Donald Kettl argues that Federalism is the reason for our division. His case hinges on the failures of Federalism. I don’t agree that Federalism is the cause, but I do agree that we are divided. Federalism is a system of government where power is constitutionally divided between the Federal government and the States.

I can easily think of two examples of how Federalism works. First, at the macro level, our country is an example of Federalism working for the last 249 years. Federalism has made the United States of America the most powerful nation on Earth. Second, at a micro level we see how the marijuana laws work. Many states have passed laws legalizing marijuana while the Federal government has not. Marijuana is NOT legal in or around Federal government facilities and properties. Yet our society has no problem navigating the marijuana laws and the issues surrounding this example of Federalism.

Instead of Federalism I have identified these 5 issues as the culprits of our division: healthcare, education, immigration, abortion, and religion. The issues are split nearly 50/50 down ideological lines.

Our government is designed to allow each side to present a cohesive and detailed proposal of their policies. Politicians do this with the sole purpose of swaying “we the people” to vote for their ideas. However, for this to work, the citizenry must be involved and informed.

First on my list of topics to discuss is healthcare. Liberal think that healthcare is a right. They want the government to provide healthcare to everyone at no cost. Conservative, on the other hand, do not believe healthcare is a right. The only rights guaranteed to us by our constitution are the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The lefts idea of healthcare has astronomical cost and is not very efficient. Proponents of universal healthcare often site Canada as an example of healthcare for all. If a person does not mind long waiting times to see a doctor or specialist, limited choices, and inconsistences among prescription drug costs then perhaps a universal healthcare plan is for you. But before you jump on the “Healthcare for all” band wagon, you must also consider the disparities between different regions and certain population groups. If the government is providing healthcare you can rest assure that taxes will be very high. It’s obvious that when the government oversees anything there is a ton of bureaucracy and wasteful spending. Big government does not seem to bother liberals, they often promote it. For the conservative approach to healthcare, I suggest smaller government, market driven competition, and a small social net for the poor. Something like our current system, including Medicare and Medicaid. Keeping what we have but making it better, sounds like a job for the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Make America Healthy Again.

Education is the next topic up for discussion. I am interested to hear how a liberal would defend the inflated cost of higher education. In Charlie Kirk’s book, College is a Scam, he points out that while our children are paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for degrees, that in many cases are worthless, they are being indoctrinated by professors who fundamentally disagree with America’s greatness. Having pride in one’s country seems to be a thing of the past, at least in America anyway. Not many years ago the left would hide the fact that they wanted globalism. Nowadays, it appears that they are proud to be globalists. American Exceptionalism is the belief that the United States holds a unique place in the world due to its history, political system, and values. American exceptionalism suggests that the U.S. is "exceptional" and different from other nations. It explains the country's historical economic growth and innovation. Conservatives see American Exceptionalism as a positive force, highlighting the nation's contributions to freedom and progress. When a person is proud of their country, that’s called Patriotism. Liberals argue that American exceptionalism fosters arrogance and that it justifies policies that ignore the interests of other nations. The thought process and policies born out of American Exceptionalism is what has created the America first movement. I think this is one reason why the left hates the slogan, “Make America Great”. When “America First” policies make America better, America becomes healthier economically. It then becomes easier for America to help its own citizens as well as helping other nations. The better we help ourselves, the better we will be able to help others. This is true for a Nation, just as it is for individuals.

From my perspective, education is just another example of failed government bureaucracy and another opportunity for the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). I am delighted to see how the Trump administration is addressing the issues that have arisen within the Department of Education over the last 60 years.

Immigration is another divisive topic. When it comes to immigration it is easy to differentiate between the liberal point of view verses how the right sees immigration. Viewing it differently is one thing but being able to understand one another is beyond difficult. Is there any defense for allowing massive illegal immigration into our country? Any argument in support of illegal immigration loses its credibility when the illegal alien tries to fundamentally change America. I imagine the people supporting illegal immigration want America to change. When “legal” aliens assimilate, they contribute to the awesomeness of our Constitutional Republic. We as a Nation benefit from their culture and experience while improving America instead of tearing her down.

True patriotism is a balance between love for one’s country and the recognition that no nation is perfect. It’s about caring enough to want it to grow and improve while protecting the rights of its citizens.

Next up; abortion. Liberals popularized the phrase, “follow the science” during the covid-19 scamdemic. I wish they would follow science regarding pregnancy. Anyone with a shred of integrity would admit that a fertilized egg is life. A zygote, an embryo, and a fetus are all alive. Most conservatives believe that an abortion is the killing a living being. Many on the left call abortion, terminating a “clump of cells”. They refer to abortion as healthcare. Anyone interested in the topic of abortion should order my book, Off Limits, subtitle, Good Arguments For Pro-Choice.

My final topic, religion. I saved this for last because I believe that religion causes the biggest gap in our great divide. History shows us that our founding fathers held Judeo-Christian beliefs. The U.S. was founded with these values, as seen in the U.S. Constitution and in the Declaration of Independence. But today, the mere mention of Christianity can cause many on the left to erupt. In the book, Jesus and John Wayne, the author Kristin Kobes Du Mez gives numerous examples of how the right and the left differ regarding religion. To me, Du Mez comes across as having destain for how the right embraces religion. She criticizes Christianity and refers to conservative as the religious right, militant Christians and many other labels that she uses disparagingly. It was not a surprise based on her subtitle. “How White Evangelicals Corrupted a Faith and Fractured a Nation”. If that subtitle wasn’t enough to divide us, within the pages of her book Du Mez calls out the white male fundamentalist while evoking the term Christian nationalism. To be honest, I actually liked how Du Mez used historical facts and examples throughout her book. I greatly appreciated how she organized the material chronologically and included pertinent information. However, what was most disappointing about her book was the obvious personal animus she has toward men and Christianity. I would interpret her writing as biased and nearly hateful. Her thoughts were accurately conveyed. Much of what she wrote about gives testimony to how the white evangelical man is masculine and traditional. What she failed to do was emphasize the difference between masculinity and toxic masculinity. The issue I want to point out is that there is nothnig wrong with traditional masculine men. However, there is no debating her when she accurately gives examples of some white evangelical men and their public failures. Those men were wrong, and they should be held accountable. Du Mez goes too far when she includes all white evangelical men in her obscure assumptions. What was most surprising about Du Mez is that she holds a Phd and is a professor. I would think that someone with those credentials would be more self-aware and wouldn't generalize to such magnitude.

Christian nationalism is a political and cultural ideology that combines elements of Christianity with patriotism. It advocates for the belief that a nation's identity, laws, and public policies should be shaped by Christian principles. I suppose that is how I see it. It’s written in our Declaration of Independence that all men are created equal. “Creation” is a core value of Christianity. I could imagine that if a liberal wrote the Declaration of Independence it would say, “all men and women have evolved and should be equal”. Critics of Christian nationalism will make the argument that it views other religions or secular perspectives as less valid in shaping the nation's identity. I concede and agree. They will go on to say that Christian nationalism excludes minority groups which challenges pluralism in diverse societies. With that, I disagree.

Pluralism is the coexistence and acceptance of diversity within a society, system, or group. It emphasizes the idea that multiple perspectives, beliefs, values, and cultures can exist together harmoniously. Pluralism can apply to various contexts, such as politics, religion, philosophy, or social structures. We have Jewish and Buddhist temples, muslin mosques, Christian churches, and other religious beliefs all across the nation and maintain peace throughout our land.

In a pluralistic society, people of different cultural backgrounds, religions, or ideologies are encouraged to engage in dialogue, cooperate, and respect one another's differences. The dialogue that comes from pluralism is the fuel that feeds our progress. Our great divide comes when we disagree with the ideas, policies, and laws that makes America great. It is important to be realistic. We should clean up our own yard before we clean up our neighbors.

I have listened to other ideas, other religions or any other possibilities that claim to provide the framework for a moral, ethical and harmonious lifestyle. I am not only willing to listen, but I have actively looked for ideas that could bridge our great divide. Ideas that encourage peace among its citizen’s without infringing on our God given rights. To do this, I have found nothing better than the teachings of Jesus Christ.

Side note: shortly after I completed this article, I received a message via social media. The person wrote to me, “You can’t be a Christian and support President Donald Trump”. To that I say, “Everyone has their opinion”. It sounds like my wish for dialogue is coming true.