Dear the Editor:
If I say it is "red", and you say it is "black", who knows? It is time to measure.
Ideally, things should be consistent and objective. There are subjective and objective philosophies. How does this affect us locally?
It is important that there should be good will on both sides in any dispute. It hardly matters whether a person is right or wrong, as long as he acts in good faith. The angels at Bethlehem said, "Peace on Earth to men of good will."
So in the various dispute about politics, one should not do what I have sometimes done and satirize the opponent viciously. A little bit OK in our garden context, but we should always grant the other party to the argument the courtesies. We learn by dialogue.
This applies in city issues like the mall and the fountain, as well as in state and national issues. I am against those who are pro-choice on the abortion issue (which is local also), but I will not call my opponent the "enemy of Christ" or do physical injury to "abortuaries," although I do call them "abortuaries."
In matters of war and peace, no one kills to keep me free, because I am against killing. Nevertheless by far most of our opponents are good people of good will. We must have dialogue.
It was Lyndon B. Johnson who said, "Come, let us reason together," about the Vietnam War - yet he was glaringly irrational about it. Let us all appeal in the current conflicts about wars, the economy, and censorship. Let us all vow to be rational and mean it.
A friend said to me once, "Sometimes compromise is perfection." This is buttressed by the old Latin saying, "In media veritas," or "truth is in the middle." I guess that most people are people of good will, who can be persuaded. The only fanaticism we should have is the fanaticism for moderation.