I was asked this week to appear again on the podcast, “A Christian and Muslim Walk Into a Studio“, hosted by Bob Prater and Emad Meerza. Bob is a long time friend, and I’m really enjoying building a new friendship with Emad. This time I put them through their paces walking them through the Eight Proven Guidelines for Civic Engagement that I used to utilize in my BridgeBuilder trainings years ago:
#1: You can’t compel people to change their worldview.
#2: No one should be asked to participate in a society biased against themselves.
#3: Vilifying those who disagree with you says more about you than it does about them.
#4: Making room at the table for divergent views does not validate those views.
#5: You best protect your civic freedoms by protecting those of people who disagree with you.
#6: If you do not include all the stakeholders you cannot fix the problem.
#7: Cooperation cannot require compromise of our deepest convictions.
#8: The best solutions arise from seeking highest possible consensus.
I think you’ll enjoy the conversation. You can watch the video of our conversation here, or find it on iTunes if you want the audio version. Just search, “A Christian and a Muslim Walk into a Studio.”
There’s also a new episode of The God Journey up today, called Breaking Up With God, which has Brad and I seeking our own common ground about those who are losing their faith in God.
Additionally Bob, Arnita, and I have already sorted through two of our chapters for the collaborative book, The Language of Healing, and am thrilled with where that might lead.
Interesting times…
No wonder some call him Jehovah Tdsnikki.
Fairly new to your blog , Wayne. Enjoy your work.
On your eight points I couldn’t agree more but I experienced a bit of a knee-jerk reaction with:
“You best protect your civic freedoms by protecting those of people who disagree with you.“
I agree in principle but in what seems to be an increasingly dangerous world there are views that wecome and are well served by my support but with never any intention of reconciliation on any level. In fact those would relish my support as a spring board for their ongoing and often dangerous agenda and it seems short sighted I include those at the table. Would value your thoughts on this.
Keep up the good work!
Hi Jeff. You’d have to listen to the interview to get this in context, but those who seek to get to the table to eliminate others from the table, demonstrate by doing so that they are not worthy to be there. What’s great about Common Ground work, is that there are groups fairly marginalized by their antipathy toward other groups. While these groups still enjoy free-speech rights and other protections of the law, there is no need to incorporate them in the larger work of seeking the common ground. Their own agenda, their desire to take the reigns of society for their own benefit, and their advocacy for violence eliminates them from participation. As it should be…