Mirah’s Reflections: Moral Incompatibility is Tearing us Apart
I keep hearing an old refrain my head:
“weddin’ bells are breakin’ up
That old gang of mine.”
And there’s Clapton’s:
“They’re tearing us apart,
They’re breaking up my heart.
I knew it from the start:
Your friends are tearing us apart.”
Today it is not wedding bells nor is it just friendships — some very longstanding real-life ones as well as newer ones created on social media — that are being torn apart, but families. Cousins who have cut all ties. Brothers and sisters estranged. Husbands and wives, adult children and their parents — all on the brink of or past the point of irreconcilable differences.
The label put on the source of the disagreements is “politics.”
But it’s far, far more than simply about which candidate or party one votes for or supports. . . it’s why we make the choices we make. It’s the ethics and morals behind the choice. It’s the rationales and justifications for behaviors many of us view as unkind, unequal, unequitable, unfair, unjust and hateful.
John Pavlovitz, pastor, activist blogger and author of A Bigger Table and the forthcoming Hope and Other Superpowers said of the current divide:
“The greatest tragedy to me, isn’t him. It isn’t that the person supposedly leading our country lacks a single benevolent impulse, that he is impervious to compassion, incapable of nobility, and mortally allergic to simple kindness.
“The greatest tragedy, is . . . that he represents you. . .”
For some families religiosity has a role in the divide. Many question how the name of Jesus Christ who preached love for all and forgiveness can be used to justify bigotry and bias. For others it is belief to one degree or another in conspiracy theories. Each side, of course, thinks the other is crazy and ignorant. The end result is rifts and deep gulfs in families that seem akin only to those that occurred before, during and after the Civil War.
Ideological differences ended my marriage decades ago. For most of our 18-year marriage we joked that we went to the polls at every election and cancelled out each other’s vote! We managed to laugh at it and continue on, like Arnold Schwarzenegger and Maria Shriver or more recently Kellyanne and George Conway.
I am a die-hard Aquarian, 60’s flowerchild, hippie who joined sit ins for integration and marches against racism, and protested against the Vietnam War and materialism who met and very quickly married a long-haired, bearded hippy-looking dude doing four-way acid tabs at a weekend-long Fourth of July campout party. I was too young and to naïve to even know what to have asked of his beleifs. and yet old enough to feel “desperate” that I was not yet married. We moved to the suburbs and I quickly transformed from hippie-chick to earth mother: homebirth, la Leche League, playgroups, PTA, class mother…. And loved every minute of it.
Not long after, I woke up with a shock to a man I didn’t recognize lying in the bed next to me. My husband had enlisted in the National Guard, shaved his beard and got a buzz cut! I hated it but . . .but by then we already had one child and another on the way. As the primary care-giver with a work-acholic husband who held two jobs and was a “weekend warrior,” I was happy and proud to be raising two out of three tree-hugging, vegan “radical liberal” snowflakes.
I crossed stitched a sampler that read: “Friendship, Love, and Truth” and hung it over our mantle. He hung his hunting rifle above it and continuing to deal with it with humor, I told everyone who entered our humble abode: “Therein lies the dichotomy of our marriage, peace and love and if you don’t believe me I’ll blow your brains out. Tee hee hee.”
My ability to laugh it off ended one day at the dinner table. Our two sons were at the age where boys talk about wanting to be fireman and other glamorous, heroic, “superman” type professions. Their father interjected monetary and salary considerations into the conversation and I countered with my thoughts that while a steady paycheck and good benefits were important so are other values and considerations like following ones passion — doing something meaningful. That conversation was the lightbulb aha moment for me. I could laugh at and ignore our differences, but we were raising impressionable children who needed, in my opinion, to be guided by more than the almighty dollar.
It was at that moment I saw the deeper ramifications of our right/left, republican/democrat marriage and him being pro-gun and my favoring gun control and all the other issues I had been able to suppress and disregard as I focused 100% of my attention on motherhood.
But I now saw the depths of the chasm of our world view and moral divide that young love and a wolf in sheep’s clothing had blinded me to and I now understand “cognitive or consensus bias.”
It took years to make the verydifficult and painful decision to end my marriage, especially because children were involved. Divorce is not a choice to be made lightly or in haste, but once my eyes were opened and the fog of denial under which I lived as a blissful, happy, content wife and mother lifted, I saw subtle but deep-seated misogynist comments to me and about others and worried for my daughter. I reflected on the racist terminology he used in our home, amazed that I had ignored so much. There was no going back.
Forty some odd years later, our children are grown. I no longer share a bed or home with their father, he is still their father and we have three grandchildren who are likewise being subjected to fanaticism, obsession with “politics”, racism and xenophobia. I am gravely concerned about the values this next generation of my family are being taught and exposed to overtly and covertly, the subtleties of language usage in their home environment by the people who shape our lives the most: their parents. And I am saddened that much of the same values and belief system difference that tore my marriage apart are endangering the marriage of at least one of my children as well.
These are differences that are tearing many friendships and families apart.
John Pavolvitz wrote an impassionaed piece entitled “No, I Won’t Agree To Disagree About This President. You’re Just Wrong” (10/18/20) which I originally attributed, as I had found it circulating on Facebook, as anonymous. In it, Paplovitz disgrees with and argues against the old cliched adisce for defusing uncomfortable empasses by agreeing to disagree:
“I refuse these terms.
“Such a concession assumes that we both have equally valid opinions, that we’re each mutually declaring those opinions not so divergent that they cannot be abided; that our relationship is of greater value than the differences — but that isn’t exactly true for me.
“We don’t just disagree here — you’re wrong.
“I believe you’re deeply, profoundly, and egregiously wrong; the kind of wrong about the kinds of things that I can no longer excuse or make peace with or overlook — because that would be a denial of who I am and what matters to me, the values I have spent a lifetime forming .. .
“We are not simply declaring mismatched preferences regarding something inconsequential. We’re not talking about who has the best offensive line in the NFL, or whether Van Halen was better with Dave or Sammy, or about what craft beer pairs best with a cheesesteak, or about the sonic differences of CDs and vinyl. On such matters (though I will provide spirited debate), I can tolerate dissension.
“We’re not even talking about clear misalignments on very important things: how to best address climate change or what will fix our healthcare system or how to reduce our national debt or what it will take to bring racial equity. Those subjects, while critically important, still have room for constructive debate and differing solutions. They are mendable fractures.
“But this, this runs far deeper and into the marrow of who we each are.
“At this point, with the past four years as a resume, your alignment with this president means that we are fundamentally disconnected on what is morally acceptable — and I’ve simply seen too much to explain that away or rationalize your intentions or give you the benefit of the doubt any longer.
“I know what your reaffirmation of him is telling me about your disregard for the lives of people of color, about your opinion of women, about your attitude toward Science, about the faith you so loudly profess, and about your elemental disrespect for bedrock truth. I now can see how pliable your morality is, the kinds of compromises you’re willing to make, the ever-descending bottom you’re following into, in order to feel victorious in a war you don’t even know why you’re fighting.
“That’s why I need you to understand that this isn’t just a schism on one issue or a single piece of legislation, as those things would be manageable. This isn’t a matter of politics or preference. This is a pervasive, sprawling, saturating separation about the way we see the world and what we value and how we want to move through this life.
“Agreeing to disagree with you in these matters, would mean silencing myself and more importantly, betraying the people who bear the burdens of your political affiliations — and this is not something I’m willing to do. Our relationship matters greatly to me, but if it has to be the collateral damage of standing with them, I’ll have to see that as acceptable.
“Your devaluing of black lives is not an opinion.
“Your acceptance of falsehoods is not an opinion.
“Your defiance of facts in a pandemic is not an opinion.
“Your hostility toward immigrants is not an opinion.
“These are fundamental heart issues.
“I’m telling you this so that when the chair is empty this Thanksgiving, or the calls don’t come, or you meet with radio silence, or you begin to notice the slow fade of our exchanges, I want you to know why: it’s because I have learned how morally incompatible we are. It doesn’t mean I don’t respect you or even love you, but it means proximity to you isn’t going to be healthy.
“I’ve been disagreeing with people all my life. That isn’t the issue here.
“Were we talking about anything less than the lives of other human beings, I’d be more than willing to disagree with you and, but since we are talking about the lives of other human beings — I can’t.
“I believe you’re wrong in ways that are harming people.
“You’re wrong to deny the humanity of other human beings.
“You’re wrong to justify your affiliation with this violence.
“You’re wrong to embrace a movement built on the worst parts of who we are.
“I simply can’t agree to that.”
Note the words impasse, concession, fundamental differences; “fundamental heart issues.” Note the words “divergent opinions” and respect and values. And note the word betrayal. To agree to disagree would be a betrayal of oneself, one’s principles and core values.
Some can do that.
A few friends and families may have such an in-depth confrontational conversation, but I think very few would. Rather, most families will manage their annual Holiday get-togethers being “civil” and polite, biting their tongues along with their turkey or tofurky while talking about sports and the weather. Most, I believe will likely agree to disagree and just avoid “hot topics” which are all around us.
But some, myself included, chose not to. Being thrust together in pandemic bubbles or pods only adds to the tensions and makes avoidance a more difficult option. Will even our firmest commitment to restrain be enough?
Elsewhere Pavlovitz echoes many very wise notables from Albert Einstein to Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. to Ellie Wiesel who noted that ignoring or silently condoning horrific acts against humanity is being complicit to it and thus equally evil, saying:
“With your silence as much as with your volume, you show me you are more with him than you are against him, that you are more like him than different from him — and that you and I are increasingly morally incompatible.”
He also spells out the crux of the issue: Moral Incompatibility.
I fear many friendships will end and families — whether they address the elephant and donkey in the room or not — will be torn apart and suffer a very sad demise.
For those currently dating…. talk about these issues. Many of us have grown up with the mandate not to discuss religion or politics. Good advice for the workplace and other casual environments. But not dating. Bring up current events and listen. Somethings are unforseen and people do change over time and some times grow apart, but core values generally remian. Don’t laugh them off.
