Something that interests me whenever I reconnect with old friends and
acquaintances is their current religious or political views. Some of
the people who were gun-ho conservative Christians back when I knew them
are now atheists, agnostics, liberal Christians, gay activists, or
indifferent to religion altogether. Some of the people who were
politically apathetic when I knew them now like Glenn Beck and Rush
Limbaugh.
There are some people who have not changed a whole lot
ideologically. They may have developed their positions a bit, but they
still believe essentially the same things that they did back when I knew
them. Or they may still hold on to most of what they used to believe,
while diverging from it in a few areas. One person I know was a
Christian right-winger back when I knew her, and she is a Christian
right-winger today. Yet, she is also a public school teacher, and so
she disagrees with certain right-wing proposals on education. She
actually urged people to vote Democrat rather than Republican in a state
superintendent race!
Could I have anticipated back then where my friends and acquaintances
would be today in terms of ideology? Am I surprised at where they are
now? In some cases, yes. But, in many cases, I can somewhat understand
how they arrived at where they are now. I was in a Bible study group
with one person, and he left the group to study the Bible and
Christianity on his own. He had doubts and questions. He wanted to
look at the Bible from a critical perspective. He told me that he wants
to find out if Christianity is true, or if Christians are deluded.
Today, he is an agnostic, and he likes Richard Dawkins and Christopher
Hitchens. I may not agree with him entirely, but I can sympathize with
how he arrived at where he is today. When prominent versions of
Christianity say that the Bible must be inerrant or Christianity is not
true—-and middle grounds between these two extremes appear mushy,
muddled, or just plain unconvincing—-then I can see why some become
atheists or agnostics.
Then there is my change. I used to lean more to the right. Now, I
am more politically progressive. In terms of religion, I am definitely
not a fundamentalist, but I do try to be open to evangelical ideas,
especially when they acknowledge what critical scholarship has to say. I
want the Bible to mean something spiritual to me, and I am open to
considering how evangelical scholars have interacted with the Bible’s
difficulties. Moreover, I want to live a healthy, spiritual life, and
so I consult evangelical sources on that. Maybe I should read secular
self-help books, too!
Believe it or not, some people have reacted to my changes. I was
known as a big-time right-winger in high school and college. I would
write articles and letters to the editor. I would challenge teachers in
class if they said something even remotely liberal. Many found me
annoying; some actually admired me. Now, those people who used to
admire me see I am more of a liberal now. One person I know said that
broke his heart! He may not have meant that too seriously, but my point
is that some are surprised by where I am now.
The thing is, I do get a bit tired of telling the same old “I used to
be a conservative, now I’m a liberal” story, like I used to be blind
and now I see. Even now, I don’t thoroughly dismiss conservatism. I
read conservative stuff each day. Actually, to be honest, I find
reading about conservatives to be much more interesting than reading
about liberals. Plus, I don’t think progressives and progressivism are
perfect. I was not blind when I was a conservative. I had some
legitimate insights. But what I learned was that the world is not black
and white—-there are shades of grey. Plus, it is hard to make one’s
way in the world, and so I have little sympathy for the “pull yourself
up by your own bootstraps” mentality that is rampant within
conservatism.
But, to be honest, I cannot be a liberal in the same way that I used
to be a conservative. Back when I was a conservative, I felt that I had
to show that the Republicans are perfect whereas the Democrats are
flawed. And, given enough research, I could back that up. It is not
hard in this age of the Internet to challenge the outrageous attacks
from the “other side”—-whatever that “other side” may be in relation to
you—-for any side may have a legitimate reason for what it is doing, or
some explanation, or some ability to point to positive things that were
done on its watch. I am open to that. But I also realize that no side
is perfect. Thus, while as a conservative I felt a need to defend
George W. Bush from every criticism, to uphold him as perfect, I feel no
compulsion to do that with President Barack Obama now that I am a
progressive. Sure, I’ll respond when I feel a need to respond, but I am
under no illusions that President Obama or the Democrats are perfect.
They’re not. They’re human. Humans are flawed and make mistakes. This
is true of all sides.
You may think in reading this that I consider myself an open-minded,
level-headed fellow. Well, not everyone who knows me will affirm this
self-description! I can get pretty combative in online and group
discussions about political and religious issues. But I think that I
tend to be more open-minded when I am alone—-by myself, reading and
considering issues—-without some need to prove myself to others, or to
combat those who are shoving their beliefs down my throat or acting as
if their way of seeing things is the only legitimate perspective.
Anyway, those are my ramblings. I went from how people I knew changed to….well, wherever I ended up!