Nov. 7, half the country figures to be celebrating, the other half commiserating. Will the level of animosity and downright hate between Democrats and Republicans reach new heights on that Wednesday morning, or will citizens accept the results and move forward for the good of the republic?
Much depends on habits of mind we should cultivate right now so that we are prepared for the unavoidable outcome. The academic study of religion might provide a helpful perspective.
Using psychology and sociology to explain why a person chooses to embrace a particular religion only gets you so far. One’s place of birth, parental training, childhood experiences and personality all help to understand why someone is, for example, a Jew, Christian or Muslim, and whether they follow a conservative or liberal interpretation of their faith. But there is also an X factor at work that influences our religious commitments.
The same is true, in some respects, of political affiliations. You can explain voting behavior to a certain extent using political science, but there are imponderables that defy technical analysis. So we have to accept that good and sensible people will practice a particular religion or brand of politics different from our own no matter how puzzling or unpalatable we might find it.
At certain moments while teaching about the world’s religions, I can sense that some of my students find it hard to believe that anyone could possibly embrace a faith different from their own (or any faith in the case of the atheists in class). Yet, most of my students eventually come to accept that people of faiths that differ from theirs are sincere, intelligent, ethical persons who should be treated with respect.
The same is true of many, but by no means all, citizens of this nation. They accept the right of the religious “other” to hold different beliefs and to practice different rituals, even though they would never seriously consider embracing another faith (or perhaps any faith).
Most Americans don’t disparage people of different faiths because of the impact on our thinking of the First Amendment: no state-sponsored religion and no prohibition of religious expression. Our instinct is to let everyone practice religion as they wish, and to defend their right to do so.
Not so, in some cases, with the political “other” who may be ridiculed and vilified, as we’ve often seen during presidential election campaigns. We’ve heard too many people say they “detest” Obama or “can’t stand” Romney. And sometimes Obama’s Muslim parentage (his absentee Kenyan father) or Romney’s “strange” LDS faith are used to support these prejudices.
Our nation and its leaders will need to call upon the concept of civil religion to cope with the host of problems facing whatever administration takes charge Jan. 21 – the national debt, unemployment, poverty, terrorism and many others.
Civil religion is the belief shared by all Americans that we are bound by a quasi-sacred document – the Constitution – common democratic values, national holidays and symbols and a secular covenant to make our nation the “city on a hill” of colonial idealism that promotes a more-just world.
Despite the significant ideological differences between conservatives and liberals, we will all need to listen to the wisdom of the other party if we are to remain a beacon to this wounded world.
The sages of the Talmud ask, “Who is wise? One who learns from all people.” We have much to learn from one another in 2013 and beyond.
