Attempting to fulfill the multitudinous social constructs that have been created to define what a human being is or should be, is a burden no person should have to carry. The only designation that should be ascribed to a human being is that individual’s binomial nomenclature—human being.
The essence of our humanity is our humanity. The principal characteristic that makes me the person I am is that of a human being, meaning, my superior mental development, the power of articulate speech, and my upright stance.
Although we have come to learn that evolutionary biological variables define our development through the lifespan and social forces influence our thoughts, tendencies, desires, interests, and behaviors, the underlying construct that lies at the heart of those factors is our humanity.
With the ideas above still in view, I reject any label that seeks to minimize and deprive me of my humanity.
As a human being, I hold some philosophical worldviews that others might not agree with. And there are those who espouse views that I do not consent to. But it is our differences that make our humanity so compelling.
The problem we run into as human beings is trying to get others to subscribe to our way of seeing the world without extending to others the right to present alternative positions that might challenge our firmly held beliefs.
For example, if a white person does not agree with or criticizes certain aspects of black culture, then that person risks being labeled a racist. If a black person speaks out against systemic racial injustice based on evidence and personal experience, then that individual might be viewed as a race-baiter or unpatriotic.
Why does it have to be this way? Why does it seem like the only way to express the essence of our humanity is to take a hardline approach on one side of an idea? What benefits are there to be gained by using labels to pigeonhole others into a caricature of one’s own imagining?
You may choose to skip the following shameless plug. However, if this topic interests you, which it should, then I recommend reading my latest release “Choose Love Not Hate” to learn more about what I had to say concerning free speech, ethics, love, hate, intolerance, vulnerability, spirituality, listening, etc. Click here to order your copy today. #SupportIndieAuthors. Now back to the post.
Because someone chooses to live his or her life without the guiding influence of theism or other supernatural beliefs does not mean that person cannot break bread with religious adherents. Because a person celebrates heterosexual relationships, does not imply that person has disdain for LGBT people and their lifestyles.
So what if a person chooses to see the good in Donald J. Trump? Let that person be. That’s his or her view. And if you think Trump is a narcissistic bigot, then that’s your opinion. But why do hate and indifference have to enter the picture?
How do divergent views make someone else less of a person? Are others not entitled to free speech and allowed to have dissenting views and opinions?
Why can’t we challenge each other’s viewpoints without stripping away each other’s human dignity through ad hominem attacks and mischaracterizations? We should not have to agree with each other just to get along.
Let me close with this. In the end, we all share the same fate. We will all return to the source from whence we came. So let’s use our short time on earth to enrich each other’s lives—especially those with whom we disagree. Let us love and live to be the caretakers of each other’s destinies because that is who we are by nature.
Since you’re here…
…I wrote a book about love with the aim of sparking a national conversation about tolerance, diversity, and inclusion. The goal is to get Choose Love Not Hate into every home and school, and make our communities places of intercultural learning and hubs of compassion. It would mean the world to me if you ordered a copy of Choose Love Not Hate today. Thank you.