I pride myself on being an accepting, liberal person. It is my strongly held belief that everyone deserves the right to equality, protection and respect despite one’s socioeconomic, sexual, gender, or religious affiliation. I pride myself on being this accepting person, yet when I am faced with people of anti-Muslim, anti-abortion and isolationist views, I judge them, shut them out—I cannot understand or accept such views.
So this poses an interesting question: what is acceptance? And how far must we compromise our own principles in order to be an ‘accepting person’?
The 2016 presidential race has brought out the worst in our society and its leaders. Intra- and inter-party debates have only furthered the divide between right and wrong and clarified the direction our country should move in.
According to CNN, the December GOP debate attracted 18 million viewers, the third-largest viewership in its history. Much of this turnout is credited to the offensive and entertaining performance by Republican candidate Donald Trump.
Trump, who HuffPost Pollster reports as still leading the Republican polls with 37.4 percent of supporters, has attacked minorities of just about every demographic group as well as well-regarded fellow Republicans like Jeb Bush and John McCain. In such debates and public appearances, Trump has dismissed the qualifications of his peers, talked over his fellow debaters, and made impressively disturbing faces in response to their words. Such aggression has painted Trump as well as his supporters as unaccepting and prejudiced individuals, at least in my eyes.
Many of these debates have spilled into our classrooms, sparking students to make vicious attacks on their peers’ moral character and intelligence.
In my global issues, comparative politics and math classes, I have witnessed students insulting, laughing at and screaming at one another based on their views of women’s rights, foreign policy stances, and attitudes towards minorities (in particular, Muslims). In these impressive spats, random unsupported facts are thrown from every side. I find that when others talk, the opposition speaks over, and louder.
News flash: being louder doesn’t make you right.
As I listen to both sides, my blood starts to boil. Why do others feel like they have the right to decide that one gender should be more supported than another? Who has the right to say that citizens of impoverished areas and war-torn foreign nations are not as deserving of life and protection? How can so much uninformed hatred build up in such an educated environment? How could they be so ‘wrong’?
I stop myself here. Who am I to say what is right and wrong? My views are based on my upbringing: my Jewish faith, my family, and my life experiences. But those who genuinely believe in the opposition would say the same thing. They too see their views as common sense, even though I see them as forms of ignorance and hatred.
So I come back to acceptance. What does it all have to do with principles, Donald Trump, and heated debates in high school classrooms?
Acceptance is not about compromising one’s principles; it’s about being able to understand that everything is relative. Debating a person of opposition to your own beliefs doesn’t make you unaccepting. In fact, true debate is probably the closest you can come to acceptance.
It comes down to listening: not just hearing, but paying attention to the justifications behind every view. The loudest opinion in the room is not necessarily the right one. But being accepting means understanding that it isn’t necessarily the wrong one either.
tom brady • Mar 9, 2016 at 8:48 am
How could the B&W allow this to be published
tom brady • Mar 9, 2016 at 8:47 am
wtf is this
We need a revolution • Feb 20, 2016 at 10:25 am
Yet when I am faced with people of anti-Muslim, anti-abortion and isolationist views, I judge them, shut them out—I cannot understand or accept such views.
Shoud be:
Yet when I am faced with people who are concerned with national security, the protection of life and overcommitment to international affairs- I shut myself off to contradictory opinions. Mind you, I am still accepting. Just not to Americans, evangelicals and veterans.
Smithsonian Quote of the Day • Feb 10, 2016 at 10:42 am
“America is all about speed. Hot, nasty, bada** speed”
-Eleanor Roosevelt
Mrs. Eagan • Feb 10, 2016 at 9:46 am
People had better stop impersonating other people on these articles.
The Listener • Feb 8, 2016 at 2:08 pm
“I pride myself on being an accepting, liberal person…I judge them, shut them out—I cannot understand or accept such views. ” this is contradictory
The Man, The Myth, The Legend • Feb 5, 2016 at 10:34 am
RG3 is going to Dallas next year
fan • Feb 8, 2016 at 11:03 am
Go DC football team
The Listener • Feb 4, 2016 at 2:17 pm
also nobody likes jeb. hes low energy.
The Listener • Feb 4, 2016 at 2:12 pm
So what you basically are saying is that you are right and a great and accepting person, and if you disagree that person is a bigot.
Trump 2016 • Feb 4, 2016 at 9:04 am
Being accepting and being liberal aren’t synonymous. not sure how this first sentence made it past editing.
You know it. • Feb 5, 2016 at 10:41 am
Because its whitman.
NotFeelingTheBern • Feb 5, 2016 at 2:01 pm
Major props to you man. Agreed completely. These liberals need to slow their roll and stop infecting our school newspaper with their propaganda.
Could Not Agree More • Feb 20, 2016 at 10:19 am
Progressives should be called regressives when it comes to free speech.
Trump 2016 • Feb 4, 2016 at 9:02 am
Trump 2016, sorry you can handle this lady. Prime reason for why a woman isn’t ready to be president *cough* Hillary. She belongs in the big house a lot more than she does the White House. Also why is it unreasonable to put a hold on the one group of people who committing all the terrorist activities? Get real
Anonymous • Feb 3, 2016 at 10:42 am
ur mad trump 2068+1
Rosalie Fox • Feb 2, 2016 at 9:17 pm
Hayley’s opinion piece is an example of critical thinking at its best. She asks provocative questions that everyone — students and non-students alike — would be well served to consider. Her conclusion that “debating is probably the closest you can come to acceptance” rings true to me, both as a former debater and adjunct college professor. Truly listening to the other side, as one has to do in a debate, would go a long way in helping people bridge the divide that tears people apart. Our politicians would do well to read what Hayley has to say and to behave accordingly.
The Listener • Feb 5, 2016 at 1:48 pm
everybody is just a philosopher aren’t they? your attempts at being articulate have failed
The (better) Listener • Feb 11, 2016 at 12:51 pm
Her comment makes sense to me.
Hi • Feb 25, 2016 at 6:29 pm
Hey Ms. Eagan!