When you examine some of the worst atrocities of humanity, look back through history’s wars, and examine some of the major conflicts in today’s news, a common thread in these conflicts is religious intolerance. I’m not a religious scholar and this isn’t a treatise on religion. It is a recommendation based on an incident involving a group of young children of mixed faiths playing together on the playground.
The conversation started innocently enough when one of the youngsters made a reference to one of his Hindu Gods. Another child quickly stated an opposing viewpoint due to her faith’s differing beliefs. In a matter of minutes, there was an all out name-calling, yelling, my-God-is-better-than-your-God rhetoric, threatening, fist waving, tussle brewing. Thankfully, one of the older kids interjected and made everyone apologize before these friends damaged each other’s friendship irreparably. Why do children as young as six years old already harbor so much intolerance for others’ beliefs? Doesn’t this sort of intolerance lead to the wars and genocides we read about from history and in our newspapers today? What can we do to foster tolerance of different ideas, religions, beliefs, etc.? These are questions that came from our youngster after this disturbance.
What did we do? First, we all agreed that these kids need to remain friends and learn to respect each other’s differences. As a family, we watched Elizabeth Lesser’s TEDTalk entitled “Take the Other to Lunch”. Elizabeth does a very good job of showing how much easier it is to accept a person’s differing beliefs if you get to know that person before passing judgement. And from our observations, this kind of engagement must start in early childhood. Otherwise, humanity may pay dearly with human lives lost in pointless conflicts. We should be joining each other for lunch instead!
Watch Elizabeth Lesser’s Talk and tell us what you think.
Posted by Luke Holzmann on Thursday, June 23, 2011 at 9:05 am
I believe the problem of “Otherizing” is based in over-simplifying the tension to sound-bytes for easy retort. Are your pro-life or pro-chioce? Are you anti-women or anti-baby? Do you trust God or Science? Do you accept our flawed view of the natural world or some lame religious text? Do you care about people or your pocketbook? Do you love freedom or stealing from others?
I think the lunch idea is a good start because it allows us to peek into how the other side thinks. But that’s not a solution. The solution is built on becoming good thinkers who can see beyond the rhetoric and straw men and false assumptions of both sides to get to the fundamental thesis that drives each belief and idea. Then we can decide why we disagree based on those fundamental differences. At that point, however, the solution still does not exist. The question which surfaces again and again throughout history is this: How do we respond to those who see the world differently than us to the point where lives–both ours and those around us–are threatened? Because isn’t that what the abortion, religion and political divide is all about: The condition of people?
~Luke
Posted by ginac on Thursday, June 23, 2011 at 9:32 am
Thanks for your well-stated comment, Luke. We don’t have to agree with the other, we just have to try to understand and tolerate those whose beliefs are fundamentally different than our own.