To Suggest An 'Amicable Divorce' For America Is To Talk Civil War

We are deeply divided. There can be no argument about that. But, why are we divided? Can we heal the divide? That is the question. We are divided because our enemies learned (the hard way) that there was no other way to defeat us. So, they have infiltrated us. They have infiltrated our institutions of cultural and news media. They have infiltrated our institutions of education. They have used these as bases to attack us and breached our defenses weakened by doubt. Ultimately they will be victorius unless we begin fighting back. The election of President Trump was the first sign of that fight and our enemies have been in a panic ever since trying to reclaim the initiative. The elections this November will tell us if they can.

(Thinking cap on-this will be a long response)

Interesting share. Every time this topic (or similar) comes up, I want to launch a diatribe regarding how truly dangerous the notion of "civil war" is. Moreover, I'm tremendously disappointed in how casually and cavalierly any said eventuality is bantered about among many...and normally point out to anyone willing to listen how foolish the suggestion of such a conflict is. The article seems to illustrate many of these points.

I've visited the graves of my ancestors who died in the last one. As a veteran, I can respect the courage, resolve, capability, and even the memory of many who fought on either side in that war. As a student of history, I can detail the changes it brought about that allowed us to contribute to decisive victories in later years. As a human being, I'm appreciative of the fact that our Civil War ended the institution of slavery. However, as an American and a father, I cannot escape the opinion that this conflict was fought needlessly, and for a host of reasons that now, as then...I'd regard as immoral.

In that sense, I'm very committed to the notion no such war should ever be fought again.

Most people on RP know that I'm pretty "open" regarding my faith. It may annoy some, but in many debates, it's the central impetus behind my point of view...therefore, essential to mention. In the same manner, I'd suggest that faith, whether one has it, or not, and regardless of which faith one may or may not subscribe to...is the "key" to solving this troubling issue.

What do I mean?

If we're to be honest (and such topics demand no less), we too share much more in common as a society than those issues which divide us imply. In general, we share a culture that seeks self-fulfillment over collectivism...even if some of "us" think we endorse the latter. We seem to universally value the freedom to express ourselves, pursue dreams, re-invent our existence by will, and chafe at any attempts to limit these passions. "Right" or "Left", Conservative or Liberal, Republican or Democrat, male or female, "White", "Black", "Brown" or any other demographic...we want to live as our principles, not edict, demands.

A person's belief in, or lack thereof, in the divine is their primary "law". Strip away the "memes", the "one liners", the trotted-out "talking points", the need to be viewed as "supportive" of a given side, and at the end of it all, the FEAR of having one's spiritual beliefs made "outlaw"...or contra-positively, having those beliefs imposed upon one by law, is the root of all division. Take any given issue, and there is a "line" that the individual is incapable of crossing...more because doing so requires surrendering to those fears, than any deep-seated rejection of any compromise or solution available.

I'd offer that we're "divided" along three primary fault lines; Economics, Race and Religion. Of these three, the latter is the breakwater. Any responsible society knows (from bitter experience) that ignoring poverty is a mistake. Regardless of whether one is a capitalist or a communist, it's common sense that a population needs to believe in some path to fiscal security. Serfdom inspires rebellion, perhaps quicker than anything else-ask Louis XVI or Nicholas II. While there are those among our population who vehemently present arguments for or against racial equality...the truth is that few to none actually form their opinions based on the color of another's skin. From the moderate to the radical, these opinions are actually rooted in how each race perceives the other's cultural values and guiding aims relative to their own. Both of these "fault lines" have the ability to be bridged by compassion, understanding and forgiveness for past wrongs.

No such bridges exist when it comes to religion.

While an individual's beliefs can, and do change...faith (or it's absence) as a principle, remains in society. Neither education, nor proselytization will ever create a contiguous, unanimous point of view either way. Similarly, because each competing view of cosmology demands that the other be wholly "wrong"...there can be no compromise. While the prince and the pauper can find common grounds for existence, and the children of one race find brotherhood with those of another...the believer and the skeptic can never be reconciled without one side conceding defeat to the other.

I believe our Founding Fathers understood this.

Our greatest tool in preventing another, undoubtedly more horrific "civil war" is found in our Constitution:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

This clause allows for both ideologies to exist within the same society, but as separate entities, wholly sovereign to their own principles without requiring sedition towards the same. Law cannot make a belief or rejection of that belief the fulcrum for balancing justice. This also compels government to remain "neutral" on issues regarding religious belief and practice...by no means an easy task, but certainly an essential one to unity.

If and when this balance is upset, it injects reticence into any given lesser issue. People will refuse compromise leading to economic stability if they believe the ends require means that violate their conscience. Otherwise peaceable people will adopt an aggressive stance when they believe their opponents' ultimate goal is their ideological extinction. Leading up to and even during our Civil War, both sides adopted religious rhetoric to "defend" their reasons...when the actual forces at play were economic and cultural. When twisted out of their framing, Religion and Rationalism can become dangerous catalysts for the very doctrines either denounce.

To conclude (this extremely long essay), another civil war is not inevitable...at least not to my mind. However, we should always stop and consider that ensuring that provision requires that both "sides" of the cosmological coin respect boundaries. This probably requires the maturity to accept difference...even extreme divergence of opinion, allow that there comes a time when walking away is the best defense, and on either end of the spectrum, rejecting the notion that law should ever be used to compel one to break with their principles.

It seems to Me that some people just fail to understand what this great country has achieved. Yes there were bumps and grinds along the way but that life anyway everywhere. The point is not to forget what has happened and don't repeat the mistakes but learn from them and move on. We need to have a united front and not tolerate those that demand We only think like them and stand up for the rights many have fought and died from. Only a complete idiot would seek anything else and try to forget our past and heritage. Seems there is no shortage of those idiots We don't need them silencing the rest of us and blindly leading us into certain disaster. Military people have always made those contributions, perhaps many others should follow that example including the politicians. Give Me Men and Women that think for themselves and actually help make thing better and retain our Freedom and not allow it to be eroded.