But seriously. Shortly after posting my last blog, I went to lunch with a good friend who mentioned he had read it. After settling in at the table and ordering, he announced that he had a few bones to pick about some of the statements I made about what I believe. After recovering from my initial internal reaction, which was "oh shit, this is why I have never before wanted to put myself out there," I decided to take a deep breath and enter into the murky territory I call "exchange of ideas" aka "opportunities for serious conflict among friends and family." The 2 primary items that he wanted to discuss were (1) my statement about "opportunity and prosperity for all" and (2) my seeming unwillingness to discuss specific positions or policy matters.
My friend expressed concern that "prosperity for all" meant that I was supporting an entitlement handout mentality. He felt very strongly that there were certain members of society who were not interested in bettering themselves or availing themselves of opportunities; they merely wanted a handout. I contrasted this category of people with those in my immediate community that I had read about in my local newspaper over the holiday season.
There is an annual "Season of Caring" initiative in the Austin community that highlights the plight of certain families in need and invites local citizens and businesses to make contributions to help these families. Most of the stories I had read described earnest people with serious needs and problems. Admittedly, there were a few situations where perhaps some better judgment (or birth control) could have alleviated some of the burdens that these families were facing. But I believe my friend acknowledged that the example I described to him represented a family with true needs that our current health care system didn't adequately address. And I assured him that most, if not all, of the other families depicted were similarly situated.
As I thought about how to address the issue of handouts vs. helping the less fortunate in our society, the second item that he took issue with -- my seeming unwillingness to discuss specific positions or policy matters -- was immediately put into play. I acknowledge that part of my hesitation to engage in political discourse is grounded in insecurity. I am not a policy expert. I don't have a bevy of facts and figures at my recall that are Western culture's hallmarks of "knowledge" and "expertise" (as opposed to wisdom). I don't have the "right" answer, or really any answer. But I do have some thoughts and ideas, and I am willing to share them with those who are interested in listening.
What I do believe is that our society has to address this issue from the perspective of "what size and strength of safety net do we fashion?" Do we let one truly needy and deserving person drown so as to make sure we don't give a lifeline to someone who doesn't deserve it, or do we tolerate some people getting a "free ride" in our net so that more of those truly in need are served? Our criminal justice system and laws were enacted from the framework that our society believed it was better for a guilty man to go free than for an innocent man to be jailed. While Project Innocence has shown that it is very questionable whether our laws and system are working as intended, the initial intent and framework are still valid.
I realize that not everyone will agree on the answers to these questions. For those who respond that we shouldn't tolerate people getting a "free ride" even if the net does save some deserving folks, my response is "why not?" What is the great harm if someone benefits who doesn't deserve to? Is it that justice must be served? Is it a "slippery slope" concern? Something else? I really am curious. For me, I am more invested in people than in justice. I also believe in abundance, not scarcity. So I am not concerned about the slippery slope.
I am not advocating any specific policy about any particular issue. I am certainly not a socialist. I just want the mother with cancer, who can't maintain a job because of her illness and whose young adolescent son cares for her, to have access to affordable medicine that might enable her to be in less pain and him to reclaim his childhood.
I will lose any argument or debate where winning requires the recitation of statistics or facts that I am not likely to have knowledge of. But some knowledge comes to you not from your head but from your heart. This I Believe.
Teresa
No comments:
Post a Comment