View from the North 40: In the end, it's just a question

My parents did their best to teach their children to be fair to a fault. It made thinking hurt sometimes.

Despite our demands for sympathy in disagreements, moral disputes and a wide variety of emotional issues surely destined to ruin our lives — forever — their first response to drama was to tell us to consider how the other person, group or entity felt and to think about other viewpoints of any story or issue.

I'm sure they would not approve of my current, and ironic, intolerance of intolerant people, which has been knocking me off my center.

They were the king and queen of a little land called “You’re not the Center of the Universe,” which was located in a stormy “Get Over Yourself” region of a rocky planet called “Be Rational.”

Though I have been known to stray into the land of “What about Me” and too often taken a space flight to a strange little gaseous planet called “Of course, I’m Right,” I am always driven to return to the place where my roots first took hold in the rich, dark, “Let’s Think About This a Minute” loam.

Granted, my success at growing things in this loam is spotty. I try, but my well water has too much sarcasm in it. I've had it tested.

I digress, though.

Despite my lapses and despite my sarcasm, I do try hard to see the world from different perspectives or at least acknowledge that other perspectives exist.

The perspectives aren’t just right or wrong, this or that, black or white. They’re fuller. They’re the things we should be asking questions about. We can also make projections, imagine how changing some of the details changes our ideas or feelings, look into the future, all these things help develop a fuller understanding of the issue, and yourself and the world around you.

So says the royal edict from the king and queen.

For example: boxers or briefs? The question isn’t just what is better, it’s also: If you’re OK with briefs, would you wear a Speedo? Alternately, if you’re comfortable with boxers, would you go commando? (Nope, don’t answer that out loud.) What if wearing your undergarment of choice were potentially bad for your health? Or if they didn’t suit some activity you want to pursue seriously in your life?

What if the clothing styles of another country included a completely different and more comfortable under-there-wear design? Would you switch? If not, would that be because the import price was too high? Or would you not switch because you only wear American-made unders? Or some other reason? Is your choice rational?

Yes, if it can confuse the underwear issue, this can make any topic an over-thought mess, stymied with analysis paralysis. Some days I can’t even decide if I should support the dairy and grain producers, the pork and egg industries or the donut manufacturers united with my breakfast choice.

Truly, my parents did not make life easier for me. They didn’t think that was their duty. Raising thinkers was.

Maybe they made life easier for others, though, because — if I’m approaching life right — then I think before opening my mouth and what comes out as expression of opinion is not so loud and divisive.

I think this is the root of my issues with intolerant people. They act, loudly, in contrast to all I was taught to aspire to.

So for all those right-leaning conservatives who have been harshing my vibe, think on this for a while:

What if Kim Davis, the infamous county clerk in Kentucky, was a Muslim woman in a headscarf refusing to hand out marriage licenses to gay couples because “Allah forbids”?

(I got so lost while tracking the number of perspective changes in that question, I think I traveled to a new dimension at [email protected].)