I think I've talked about religion enough here and there. I'm religious in the sense that i believe in God. I'm fairly liberal in the sense that I believe in reducing income disparity, implementing tax reform on corporations, going green with energy production, equality in social justice in treatment of all people across ethnic, sexual and sexual orientation grounds, etc. Since I know religious people are a diverse group with an inherent motivation to discuss what they believe, I 'get' the door to door thing. I prefer to talk about my faith over a good pint at the bar to the tune of Kendrick Lamar, but hey, everyone's got their thing.
Overall I enjoy talking to people. I enjoy exchanging points of view, even when they diverge largely from my own. I think that even among Democrats I tend to disagree with many statements because of reasons ranging from lack of citation to argument building. Since my background is as a Historian, lack of citation is a argument killer for me. Often when the source is cited, the source itself is weak, so I again find it hard to accept arguments that, while I emotionally agree with them, don't stand on statistical evidence.
Religion is slightly different since very often the argumentation can rest on two points. 1, the argument for the miraculous elements or 2, the value of the teachings. While there's some value to the miraculous component, I've always been a bigger advocate of the Jesus values. Now I get DK is full of people that don't even like Jesus. Fair enough.
The point of the diary is that because I enjoy argumentation I inherently enjoy the people that come to my door, not because I'm looking for an intense battle of the minds but because I want to see the angle they approach with in the debate. So I was pleasantly surprised that my current visitor opened with warnings concerning the dangers of global warming, climate change and the potential destruction of humanity by our own hands. She was a small Hispanic woman. I stand six feet tall and two hundred fifteen pounds with a broad frame, while at best she was five foot four, with wide, round glasses that magnified her face and a sharp accent.
So what did I love about the debate. Well.
1.) The line of reasoning. More than anything I enjoyed this line of reasoning using modern changes in the climate and the potentially destructive influence that has on global lifeforms as a potential fulfillment of ancient prophecy (I don't have to buy the ancient prophecy part to appreciate the way the science was blended with the faith component).
2.) The human interaction. They seemed like good people. Her tall, white, male, old and overweight companion hovered behind her. I think he might have been a form of 'discussion coach' intended to back her up if things got rough. But I won't make life hard on you unless you start telling me we need to eliminate the minimum wage or why gay marriage will destroy traditional marriage. Those lines of argumentation are meant solely to deprive people of rights.
3.) Moments. In life you only get so many. They woke me up because, as an 'outside educator' (read: tutor) my day starts at noon and runs to close to midnight. I got to meet an excitable short Hispanic woman and a tall portly white man that I may never see again but much like two drops in a bucket, the ripples of our lives touched briefly. You don't get those moments back and you can process them as a part of your life any way you want, but for me, as much as I don't 'like' many people, I definitely love human lives.
So in the end this is a Slice of Life Diary. You don't have to like it. Some of you will probably latch on the religious part and scream ALL RELIGION SUCKS. Most everyone that comes to Daily Kos won't read it. And many of you will be too busy worrying about important things like elections. But then again, these are called diaries for a reason. I think retrospect I just really hope they're with me on issues like gay marriage and higher taxes on the wealthy as they were on global warming.