Someone suggested we get rid of parties. Parties came into existence because there was a fundamental difference in thinking. Today much of our choosing parties is traditional. Removing party names still leaves the question of what do you believe in.
There is a truth in the human existence called the law of likeness. We identify or not, with things, people, thinking, etc. Our choice can be so shallow as in identifying with a name, a team, a denomination, and we fiercely guard our choice. Our choice can become so certain as to resist even common sense.
We may have learned why we believe what we believe over many years and so we choose. What if our reasons for the “likeness” have changed? We did not change our views but someone has changed what once was! Where does this leave me?
Which of the areas of life or how many areas am I wanting to be “like” others or someone? Is there a conflict I must consider within my own heart when one “likeness” conflicts with another “likeness?” What am I pursuing? What is pursuing me?
I personally agree with the premise of “what is good for all not just some.”
I find a truth lurking in the political conflict, in the “likeness” conflict between two aspects of my life.
The truth lurking is in the questions, who wants good, who wants evil? Which do I want to be “like?” What was once good, has it now become evil?
I would gladly “change sides” once I realized good was being cast aside for evil. What is evil? Ask yourself? What do you consider evil to be?
In this election, is it personality or is it policy? Policy and its long lasting effects truly identifies me if I agree with it or vote for it.
In this election, is it personality or is it policy? Policy and its long lasting effects truly identifies me if I agree with it or vote for it. in this election and maybe forever.