Reclaiming True Diversity

Sometimes it's easy to say no to a movement or cause just because of some of the characteristics of its supporters. Diversity is a prime example, I think. I used to take a negative view of diversity because it struck me as propaganda, a movement hijacked by the politically correct crowd, aimed at freezing free speech which may be opposed to their favored causes of the day--e.g. gay marriage.

While in many respects, diversity can quickly become a cliche, there is real and substantive truth there, as well. Lately, I have been endeavoring to use the language of the enemy against the enemy and for the cause of truth. This is probably easiest to illustrate with a couple examples. If an atheist opposes symbols of faith, for instance, I might point out that the atheist's position is simply a different expression of a distinct faith. A belief in God and a belief against God are both positions which cannot be proven using scientific methods alone; they require faith. For example, I successfully argued at a state agency years ago, that New Age training within a state seminar was a form of religious promotion; the training program was revised accordingly. I didn't just slam my fist into a table and demand a change. I used their own language and value system to argue for my position of religious faith. I spoke their language.

Another example would concern those who preach diversity, yetwho bear no shred of tolerance for opinions different from their own. It's a two-way street, folks. This is a point worthy of repetition, as it comes up so frequently.

What does this have to do with the clarion call for diversity? Well, what do we mean by true diversity? It's a recognition of many different cultures and belief systems, right? At its core, there is the quality of respect and treating others as we would want to be treated. These are biblical concepts, beliefs grounded in faith. I submit to the reader that these Christian principles need to be taken back and applied to everything from immigration reform to safeguarding free speech. If they want to communicate this way, let's give it back to them in full measure!

While my point of view holds that the diversity movement can be important because it reflects the differences within God's diverse and varied creation, I don't hold that it justly applies to chosen behaviors. Even still, though, the Christian has no argument with regards to the imperative need to show and demonstrate respect and courtesy for the homosexual just as much as to the poor immigrant. They are both human beings made in the image of God, requiring redemption as all of us do. (I suppose this explains some of my ambivalence towards the present Indiana controversy.)

So, if you work within a politically correct environment, you may find it helpful to defend your position with the liberal's own toolbox of words and phrases; it really gets under their skin. After all, it's not an excuse for inaction that some people may do what's right for entirely the wrong reasons. We should strive to do the right thing for the right reasons.