Naughty-Dog Politics

By September 17, 2014Opinion

Four out of five of my children have already owned their own businesses.  My youngest daughter was breeding Labrador Retrievers for a while.  Eight or ten puppies is a handful, I can tell you.  They develop their personalities pretty quickly.  It was interesting to see how my daughter would match people and puppies based on their lifestyle.

We had a few naughty dogs.  Those were the ones I liked the most: so full of energy, sassy and fun.  They would pull up the flooring, pull down the drapes and pull out all the stops at playtime. One of them liked to scatter the food before the rest of them could get to the bowl.  This little one dumped the kibble as soon as it hit the tray.  She would spread it around as though it were her job to make sure it was distributed for every one to taste.

Conservative politics is like that.  Conservatives want to put lots of issues on the table, let every one have a say and examine the topics from various perspectives and experiences, always looking to our Founders example of debate and forums.

I really like coming together in thoughtful discussions about things.  I admit, when people are illogical, I get miffed, but most of the time logic wins in a discussion wherein people can openly state their positions.

When a bunch of people with widely varied experience and viewpoints come into a room and agree to disagree and be civil in all dealings, it is a beautiful thing to see.  The corporate brainstorming compels individual thought and intelligence is multiplied.

We may still disagree, but perspectives of others helps us to frame our future discussions.  The take aways also help us to drop language that is unproductive.  Our own perspectives might even change altogether.

When it comes to the issue of the Right to Life for all people, without exception, some will not agree.  The Right to Life is not for everyone, they say, not in so many words.

We must agree to disagree.  This is especially difficult when we are talking to policy makers and legislators.  Then, our goal must be longer term.  We need to find true ProLife candidates as soon as possible.  Being anti-abortion is insufficient.  Being ProLife means ProLife for every human being at every age and every stage, without exception.

If we exclude one or more categories of people, then are we not elitists: determining the Right to Life for others, as opposed to merely recognizing and protecting that Natural Right that already exists?

Let’s put lots and lots of issues on the table in rooms and rooms full of diverse people and let’s have some naughty-dog politics in New Hampshire.

Where will you talk about politics this week?

 

 

Leave a Reply