Wrong Question

After listening to a great sermon on Sunday morning, I used it to start conversation in Sunday school right afterwards. I started it out by asking everyone to give me and example of something that is either legal but immoral or illegal yet moral. Of course, the first thing I hear is abortion. I moved quickly, "OK, what else?" Then came capital punishment, the right to bear arms, free speech. It all came down on me fast. I wanted to focus on the concept of watching out for "the wrong question." In other words, being alert to the probable agenda of the person you're talking to. And don't just jump to conclusions about that word agenda either, cause everybody's got one. The question you have to ask yourself is, "do I want to have this conversation?" If the answer is no, then walk away or change the subject to baseball or the weather. But if the answer is yes you do want to have the conversation, then you'd better be prepared for the "wrong question." Here's an easy example: "How do you feel about a woman's right to choose?" Now, you know what the person is talking about and it isn't choosing her skin cream. If you are against abortion (remember you want to have this conversation) then you might not want to reply, "Choose murder?! Do we have the right to choose murder?" Now let's look at the other side. "How do you feel about the legality of ending the life of an unborn child?" If you are for a woman's right to choose abortion (and you want to have this conversation) you shouldn't reply, "A woman has the right to govern whatever goes on in her body." Why not? What's wrong with these responses? What's wrong with them is that they side-step the underlying issue. Unless you talk about what lies at the heart of both people's belief system, you'll get nowhere. The usual dilemma is that traditional religious folks have no trouble telling exactly what they believe and why, but your average American secularist will claim that "beliefs" hold no part of the argument. This, of course, is hogwash. What they really mean to say is "Your religious beliefs are wrong and the federal judiciary has agreed with me." This would be a more truthful response by the secularist. Now you have an argument! The religious person says that the fetus is sacred therefore you have no right to end its life. The secularist says that babies are cute and all, but a woman's right to choose what goes on in her own body is sacred and therefore can't be infringed upon. Then you must both discuss what it is that you base your beliefs on. Religous people ususally have the upper hand here because they work on it all the time. Your average secularist has no idea what classical naturalism or humanism is. They should work on that and explore the tapestry of modern thought. I recommend the militant atheist lesbian feminist Camille Paglia. She's great. A note to all my religious friends: you should help people in this journey. Don't be afraid to encourage people to explore the logical outcomes of their logic. Everybody is searching for truth. If you're right, they're likely to find it some day. If you're wrong it doesn't matter anyway. A note to all my atheist friends: you should help people in this journey. Don't be afraid to encourage people to explore the logical outcomes of their logic. Everybody is searching for truth. If you're right none of this matters anyway. If you're wrong, maybe you'll have helped someone turn down the right path.