your momma is so fat,...
in my opinion, it's fairly easy for a person to determine how important something, any one thing, is to them. take any thought or belief or conviction or band or movie or television show or sports team or celebrity whose importance to party "a" is fairly high and publicly articulated. now, say party "b" disagrees with party "a" on the social, spiritual, economic, or trivial importance of said thought or belief or conviction or band or movie or television show or sports team or celebrity. party "a" thinks paris hilton is the bomb and will go to the mat for why she is vital to the fabric of our self-important country. party "b" thinks she's a worthless douchebag and that her "celebrity" is exhibit way-too-many on why everyone in the world hates the usa. party "b" goes so far as to call party "a" a dick. party "a" will not have his/her paris disrespected and returns the favor by calling party "b" a glue-sniffer and, soon enough, the point that was initially being argued is lost, two friends are no longer close and the debate on paris hilton being good for all of us is no closer to being settled than it was.
if something is important enough to you, you will fight to defend his/her/their/it's honor even if it means stooping to a level you weren't aware you could stoop to. understanding what's important to you and what's worth fighting for, well, that's what life is all about, isn't it? i've been rubber-necking at a conversation that started several days ago when a young man chose to voice his opinion on evolution vs. the creation story in his blog. i've come to know the young man (in order to protect the innocent, we'll just call him "matt") through his connectedness and relationship with my dear friend, andy. i think highly of him, but his jump-shot is kind of ugly. nevertheless, his choice to allow a group of people a window into his education and processing of that education combined with his life experience was an honorable one for sure. he's honest like that. what followed in the comments section of his blogs was not surprising. evolution is a divisive subject. for those that have convicted themselves into the idea that there is no such thing, it is even more divisive. i am not one of those people, but i respect the ideas of others enough to not really care a whole lot which "side" you fall on. it's not terribly important to me. it's not "dangerous" if you disagree with me or vice-versa. it is what it is. you subscribe to the theory or you don't. myself, i'll just say that i am in the camp that considers my mere existence a magnificent accident. i am lucky and blessed and happy to be alive right here. right now. and i am constantly trying to understand what that means for me and the people that i encounter. it's a daily struggle. what i found enlightening about the discourse on "matt's" blog, while i was peeking in, was how little the conversation moved me. there was no emotion stirred, other than empathy towards the few that seemed to be picking "sides".
now, if matt had written something about how tim hudson is losing it??? now, then i would have had a problem. if you are attacking my tim, you just be ready for what's coming to you. because if you are bashing him or his tattoos in any way, i will fight you. i am serious. i will freaking punch you in the face (and then run).
it's fascinating to me how sudden and reactive our gut is to telling us what's important and what's not. how every tiny and (seemingly) unimportant second of our lives leads us daily to these moments of "truth.", these moments that incite us to defend what we think is right and how we think you are wrong. what happened to me in these 31-plus years to make me carry such equal and different passions for humc and the "idea" of michael vick? figuring out why i would kill you if you hurt any of my girls is easy. figuring out why i would do the same if you criticized lost is a little less tangible.
the cliche' of "pick your battles wisely" has always sounded like an oxymoron to me. if you sit around and meditate on something, if you think about something with intent and concerted thought and still "pick" to "battle", then something is wrong with you. or, you are george w. bush (zing!). true battles are fought on the fields of passion and they usually make absolutely no sense whatsoever if you can take a couple breaths away from them. but those battles do tell us something about ourselves. they tell what is important to us on that day and in that moment.
today, it could be evolution.
tomorrow, it could be peanut-butter and jelly sandwiches.
whatareyougonnado?
grow.
4 comments:
This reminds me of that time two four-year-olds fought over who was going to put the baby doll back in its proper place, and they said they weren't friends anymore and cried.
Wait...that happens everyday.
;)
While I might agree with you that personal battles are fought on the fields of passion, I would disagree that they have to be/should be. Maybe being passionate about something is what drives you to battle, but I think "choose your battles wisely" is a very good rule. "Choosing your battle" means you weigh the consequences of doing battle then decide whether or not the fight is worth it. I disagree strongly with my Baptist brethren on the idea of baptism by immersion only and about not baptizing children. I've spent a lot of time studying, meditating upon, and discussing this theology so I feel strongly about my position. Will I fight them about it? No. Why? Because, in the end, it doesn't really matter so the consequences are not worth the fight. It'd be a waste of my time and accomplish nothing. That's the way I feel about evolution. I'm sort of a centrist on the issue. I believe God did create everything, but He could have used many different methods to create - evolution being one of them. The idea of a literal 7 day creation is irrelevant to me. So, just because I feel passionate about a position doesn't mean I need to let my passions carry me into battle. Likewise, I need to make sure that I never become dispassionate enough that I'm not willing to fight for that which truly does matter.
Let it be known that this "Matt" fellow got into this mess because of a dumb blog game where he was assigned a topic and therefore was bound to write on that topic or suffer severe consequences. So while it was worth talking about and sharing opinions on, it was not worth retaliating after being called a "glue-sniffer".
Also, let it be known that even though he has an ugly jump shot and knows it, he is still humbled and appreciative of the nice things said about him.
i think, chris, we might be in disagreement over my perceived definition of battle, which is not to approach solving a problem or dispute diplomatically or meditatively.
most of my "battles" (in most cases, just heated back and forths) are a product of my unbridled passion.
if i take the time to prayerfully consider something i believe strongly in versus someone who disagrees with me and use my passion as a weapon instead of a tool, that's when i become george bush.
and that's when i would be disppointed in myself. (unless my family or friends are in physical danger)if i choose to actively fight for anything, there has been a serious disconnect somewhere in my decision-making.
then again, we may not be disagreeing at all, huh?
Post a Comment