Definition of RETICENT
1
: inclined to be silent or uncommunicative in speech :reserved
2
: restrained in expression, presentation, or appearance <the room has an aspect of reticent dignity — A. N. Whitehead>
3
Definition of REBEL
1
a : opposing or taking arms against a government or ruler
b : of or relating to rebels <the rebel camp>
2
Today I woke to find that Barack Obama had been reelected as president of the United States of America. I was pretty much stunned and even cried a few tears this morning as I went through the rote routine of getting ready for work. As I showered, I started to form my thoughts ... thoughts that would not be heard by anyone. Why not? Because I'm usually a good girl and keep my mouth shut. I know what I believe and what I feel, but when faced with an argument, I'd much rather run that stand and fight. Still, the passion of my beliefs wouldn't let me just let this go. Depression began to sink in as I reflected on what another four years would bring. How could this happen? How can people be so short-sighted?
So, I thought, "What if I write a blog?" I could get my thoughts and feelings down in print, and begin to face my fears when it comes to challenges. "I'll write a blog!" thought I, "Though probably no one will read it ... and is that such a bad thing?" I'm such a chicken shit.
Now for the name. What shall I call the blog? At first, I thought of the Reluctant Republican. I am a Republican, after all, even though I don't share all the views. But reluctant? Somehow, the name didn't seem quite right.
I once heard a quote that stuck with me. I'm not sure who said it, but I'll look it up ... Anyway, it goes like this -- "Better to be silent and thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt." I once asked my fifth graders to explain this. It was a difficult task to say the least. So back to the name. I would love to be one of those people who can just talk and argue and be up on all of the facts in order to present the most intelligent case, but I'm not. I would love to stand up in a crowd and say, "Follow me! I know the whole story and this is the way to go." Again, not me. So, I remain reticent. Reluctant, restrained, silent. That's not a rebel at all, I suppose. I guess I just don't want to open my mouth to remove all doubt.
So, if anyone cares or anyone even reads this page, this is my attempt to get inside my own head and figure out what I believe and how I can make sense of the fact that others (many of whom I call family and friends) don't remotely come near understanding my points of view, and I must admit, I theirs. It may at times seem like a political rant, but I assure you, it is primarily a device for me to vent.
There you have it. I hope you will respond and participate in my discussion with me. It gets so lonely talking to myself. It would be so nice to have a civilized chat with all of you.
Thanks for reading. Hope to see you here often.
Linda
OKAY! Did my homework!
Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.
Abraham Lincoln
Abraham Lincoln
I am reading and feeling the same way you are! Very worried about our future! HOW did this happen? How?
ReplyDeleteMaybe, if we figure out the how, we can prevent it from doing more damage OR ever happening again. We've got a long road ahead.
ReplyDeleteYes we do!
ReplyDelete"They call themselves liberals, but they are intent upon abolishing liberty. They call themselves democrats, but they yearn for dictatorship. They call themselves revolutionaries, but they want to make the government omnipotent. They promise the blessings of the Garden of Eden, but they plan to transform the world into a gigantic post office. Every man but one a subordinate clerk in a bureau. What an alluring utopia! What a noble cause to fight!"Ludwig von Mises
ReplyDeleteAnd also, good for you, Linda!
ReplyDeleteLinda--I feel exactly the way you do, but I am caught in the middle: I am fiscally conservative ( and VERY concerned about the hole that we are digging ourselves into deeper and deeper and that our children will inherit ) but socially liberal ( separation of church and state ); thus I, who have been a registered Republican for the past 25 years, have only recently removed my affiliation with that party and am now officially an Independent. Because I could not fully support either candidate this year, I made the choice to throw away my vote on the Green Party candidate, Jill Stein. Her views aligned with several of mine and she is, after all, a woman. We are long overdue there ( but that's a topic for another blog, I guess).
ReplyDeleteAlthough I am a Christian, I find it very troublesome that a right-wing ultra-conservative Christian element has hijacked the Republican Party; for example, as far as the issue of gay marriage. There are church-sanctioned marriages and there are secular civil marriages. No church should be forced to recognize or marry people who go against their tenets. I absolutely support that. A Catholic church would not want to sanction any marriage I would enter into because I do not fully subscribe to their beliefs. On the other hand, the government has no right to step in and dictate the beliefs of one religious sect over another. Marriage should be strictly a matter of honoring one's civil liberties; their rights as human beings deserving of equal treatment under the law--not imposing one religion's beliefs on everyone else. Our country may have been founded by predominantly Christian people, but it was founded on the principle of RELIGIOUS FREEDOM. Those who try to legislate their religious beliefs or interpretations on the rest of the population are doing exactly what the Taliban is attempting to do in Afghanistan. Reversing the situation, if we posit the possibility ( remote as of now, I know ) that a conservative Muslim were elected to a position of power in our country, would we want him to use that power to legislate his religion beliefs on the rest of us? Of course not. That's why it's imperative to take religion out of politics, no matter how strongly you feel about it.
Which brings me to the abortion issue. I personally find abortion, especially as a form of birth control, morally repugnant. However, if the argument by some is that life begins at conception and is therefore inviolately sacred, then that belief must hold under ALL circumstances-- absolutely no exceptions as far as rape, incest, or the health of the mother. That means that those people who want to take away the right to choose must agree to scenarios such as: if their 11 year-old daughter is raped by an HIV-infected escaped convict, she must carry that baby to term. You cannot pick or choose those whose lives must be saved as opposed to those whose lives are throwaways if your moral argument is that ALL human life from conception is sacred; anything less is hypocrisy. So I would challenge any woman, despite her religious beliefs, to ask herself: if I or my daughter were in one of those nightmare scenarios, would I want to be compelled by law to live that nightmare every day for 9 months and subject my body and psyche to the toll that any pregnancy would impose upon it, even under ideal circumstances? Think long and hard before you opt to go back to the coat hanger days.
On the fiscal side, I am solidly with the Republican Party. No household can remain solvent if it lives on credit and spends more than it takes in; eventually, the house of cards collapses. We are on a disturbing downward spiral, monetarily. We need to downsize big government and return more power to the state and local levels. This is what upsets me so about Obama still being in office. Just when we need to do some major trimming, he wants to spend more money by expanding the federal government's role.
ReplyDeleteThanks for letting me let off some steam here, Linda. I know my views probably won't be popular with a lot of people who read this; but that's America. We're all entitled to our opinion. I just feel like there is no party who represents me at this point. --Stranded
Working in a theatre in NYC-- I am surrounded by hard-core democrats (who all assume that everyone else shares their views). However, while silently observing their conversations, I've realized this election is only about one issue for the majority of these people. Gay marriage. With such a personal issue at stake, it was impossible for them to care about (or even acknowledge) any other issue. I can't say I blame them entirely, but what a shame that so many people can't see the big picture.
ReplyDeleteI've always been good at seeing both sides of an argument-- I can be a true fence-sitter. That certainly held true for this election, and I agree with Michele that I can't truly associate with one party right now.
Then join us Independents, Jessi--there's plenty of room in this purgatory!
DeleteMichele, thanks for posting! (Thanks to everyone who is responding -- it makes me SO happy!) I don't think you're in the minority. That's just my point. We are all so much more the same than we are different, we just can't get past one or two issues that we think we have to fight. (More in my next post!)
ReplyDeleteLinda-- I only pray that, now that this rancorous election is over, the powers in office will finally succumb to the ancient art of compromise. We need to start meeting in the middle to accomplish ANYTHING that will get us out of this mess. And I hope that, despite the strong views that I posted earlier, this forum won't dissolve into the same level of mean-spiritedness. Like Jessi, I like to think I can view both sides objectively and, if nothing else, at least respect the other person's right to hold his/her own opinions or beliefs. I just think we need to HEAR one another, not necessarily convert one another.
Delete