Political Labels & Common Ends

© Can Stock Photo Inc. / radiantskies

© Can Stock Photo Inc. / radiantskies

I recently read an article on equality and fairness titled, surprisingly, People Don’t Actually Want Equality, by Paul Bloom published October 22, 2015, in the Atlantic. That article triggered a number of thoughts for me. I wrote about some of them in Equality, Fairness and Me.

In this piece, I want to go in a different direction. I have friends on who span the spectrum of political ideology. I tend to fit somewhere on the conservative side of things, but, as I suspect with most people, you might find my views on either side of the spectrum, depending on the issue. I am not sure how some things came to be labelled “conservative” and other things “liberal”. As for economic issues, I would probably be labeled conservative.

I don’t like the label. All labels are self-limiting. They stand in the way of true understanding. They polarize people and reduce issues to platforms. They inhibit resolution and progress toward commons ends.

We do have common ends! When we get right down to the core of what people want, we pretty much want the same things. We want fairness. We want equal opportunity. We want to be left alone. We want everyone to get along and be happy.

Some people feel that private enterprise, left to itself, will do the right thing and everything will balance out, while government intervention just messes everything up. Other people feel we need government intervention to balance everything out because private enterprise creates inequality. People run the government and people run private enterprise. (Maybe people are the problem!)

I suppose the solution is obvious: some combination of private enterprise and government is the ideal solution. That is also obviously easier said than done. How we get to the ideal solution and what it looks like is a matter of great disagreement.

I do not just speculate that we all want basically the same things. It is not just my opinion. That premise is the exact conclusion of people who have studied these things:

“[W]hen asked about what distribution would be ideal, Americans, regardless of political party, want a far more equal society than they actually live in or believe that they live in. In an article published in The Atlantic, Ariely writes, ‘the vast majority of Americans prefer a distribution of wealth more equal than what exists in Sweden, which is often placed rhetorically at the extreme far left in terms of political ideology—embraced by liberals as an ideal society and disparaged by conservatives as an overreaching socialist nanny state.’”

Ironic, isn’t it? Maybe all of our fighting based on labels of “conservative” and “liberal” are just getting in the way of getting to the resolutions that we all want.

Equality, Fairness and Me

© Can Stock Photo Inc. / Bialasiewicz

© Can Stock Photo Inc. / Bialasiewicz

I recently read an article on equality and fairness titled, surprisingly, People Don’t Actually Want Equality, by Paul Bloom published October 22, 2015, in the Atlantic. This seems like an heretical statement in the home of the brave and the land of the free where we grew up on a diet of equal rights. Of course, equality will never happen. Genes, heritage, place of birth, physical and mental disabilities and other things we do not control frustrate true equality.

The evidence in the article suggests we do not even really want equality. Studies show that “younger children actually have an anti-equality bias” and prefer distributions where they get a relative advantage.” One for you, two for me, sits well with the one who gets two. Small children and primates will complain bitterly if they get less, but are perfectly satisfied to receive more.

The author goes on to summarize: “What we see from studies of children and studies of small-scale societies is an early-emerging desire for fairness, and a particularly strong motivation not to get less than anyone else. But we don’t find a smidgen of evidence that humans or any other species naturally value equality for its sake.”

Continue reading

A Way that Leads to Life

11224320_10207795029052221_6102066277185157717_n


There is a way[1] which seems right to a man, but its end[2] is the way of death. Proverbs 14:12

We all have a “way”. The way that we traverse in this life is the path that we follow, the road that guides us, an inner compass, a moral code, a worldview. Some us, perhaps most of us, waver in the way that we travel. Some of us have constructed our own ways; others have borrowed from others: friends, family, culture, teachers, philosophers, church, the Bible and other sources.

We all have moral imperatives that guide us. They are so embedded in most of us that we hardly even think about them. When we are faced with decisions, we fall back on them, often without consciously thinking about them. They become habits of thought and action.

Continue reading

Widening Road to Destruction

Riot by Timothy Dang

Riot by Timothy Dang

The Lonely Road Ahead for Principled Roberts reads the headline to the editorial by Noah Feldman. Go ahead and read it. You can come back to this article. I will wait….

Allow me to add a little background. I beg your indulgence for a short summary of civics. Continue reading

Pain, Lies and Abortion


The videos made of the interviews with various Planned Parenthood representatives and former employees went viral and stirred up the abortion debate with new vigor in 2015, some 42 years after the US Supreme Court opinion authored by Justice Harry Blackman made abortion legal in all 50 states. As always, the debate usually focuses on the fetuses (or unborn babies, depending on what side of choice or life you stand).

I want to focus on the women who have had abortions and the women who have helped them. The pain of abortion is evident in this home made video above. 

Continue reading

Science and Societal Consensus on Fetal Life

Pregnancy by Michael Foox


I don’t like the headlines that are over sensationalized. Rubio Crushes CNN Host for His Ignorance about Human Life, is an over sensationalize headline. The annoying headline detracts from the content, which gets to the core of the pro-life and pro-choice debate, and is important.

I will say, first of all, that I have not been very much engaged in this debate for over 30 years, and I say that to my shame. I have thrown up my hands over the callousness that I see in our country on the issue of human life. The Rubio/Cuomo dialogue underscores that callousness. I am sorry that I have stayed on the sidelines.

Cuomo says that science cannot say when human life begins. Rubio says that human life begins from conception. If we were looking at those two arguments in a vacuum, with no preconceived notions, with no thought to the consequences of the argument, where do you think science would come out? Continue reading