BLOGGER
Originally from South Carolina, Abigail Clauhs has already firmly established her presence at Boston University as a junior majoring in Religion and minoring in English and Anthropology. She leads...
Where do young people come down on questions of faith, values, and public life? How do they relate their values to public policy issues including education, economic inequality, and the environment? These questions, critically important for the 2012 election, are at the center of a campus conversation being organized by the Berkley Center and Georgetown University. This blog features an ongoing conversation about these issues between students selected as Millennial Values Fellows through a national competition. You can read and comment on their blogs here.
To learn more about the project, visit the Campus Conversation on Values page.
OTHER POSTS
Millennials on Social Media and Politics
November 15, 2012
Millennials on Social Issues and Diversity
November 12, 2012
Hira Baig (Rice) on Why the Presidential Election Matters to Millennials
November 7, 2012
Millennials on Religion and Interfaith Work
November 7, 2012
Ryan Price (Drake) on E Pluribus Duo
November 6, 2012
Mohammad Usman (DePauw) on Unpredictable Millennials
November 5, 2012
Millennials on Affirmative Action Policy
November 3, 2012
Seth Warner (Vassar) on What Happens as the "God Gap" Widens
November 2, 2012
Josina De Raadt (Dordt) on How Social Media Is Like Wii Bowling
October 31, 2012
Zachary Yentzer (Arizona State) on the Next Greatest Generation
October 29, 2012
Brice Ezell (George Fox) on Post-Racial America? Race, Millennials, and the 2012 Election
October 25, 2012
Tyler Bishop (Vanderbilt) on a Future of Hashtags #whatitmeansforus
October 23, 2012
Brice Ezell (George Fox) on How the People Can Heal a “Divided,” Partisan Nation
October 4, 2012
Hira Baig (Rice) on Religion and American Democracy
October 4, 2012
Tyler Bishop (Vanderbilt) on How It’s All About Relatability: Voter Turnout
October 3, 2012
Josina De Raadt (Dordt) on Mistaking Politics for a Hollywood Blockbuster
October 2, 2012
Mohammad Usman (DePauw) on the Internet Solution
October 1, 2012
>> more
AT THE CENTER
EVENTS (17)
Inaugural Symposium: Christianity and Freedom: Historical and Contemporary Perspectives
December 14, 2012
December 14, 2012
PUBLICATIONS (17)
Political Demography: How Population Changes are Reshaping International Security and National Politics
May 31, 2012
May 31, 2012
INTERVIEWS (63)
A Discussion with Bishop Singulane on the Role of CCM in the Ending of the Mozambican Civil War
May 26, 2009
May 26, 2009
LETTERS (11)
POSTS (6)
RELATED RESOURCES: RELIGION AND PEACE
Abigail Clauhs (Boston University) on Teaching America to Talk
June 12, 2012
One of my friends at Boston University has a dream. It might not sound quite as inspirational as world peace or ending starvation in Africa, but it is important. He wants our country to rediscover the ability to have civil conversation. He told me about his plan one afternoon, his idea to organize a huge event—"our generation's Woodstock," he called it—centered on making dialogue happen.
But that's just talking, people might say. Just words. Is there any real value in that?
In our fragmented and disputing country, the answer is yes. We have a problem here in America with honest conversation. Our television screens and radio channels are full of blustering pundits and biased networks. We don't hesitate to bash the opinions of those we disagree with, without taking the time to deeply examine our own convictions and justifications.
A few weeks ago, my liberal mother—born and raised in Jersey—went to a meeting of Democratic women she had heard about in our town in South Carolina. The fact that there were even enough Democratic women to form a group in our Bible Belt town is surprising enough, but even more surprising was the derision my mother was met with in the group as soon as she mentioned she was married to a Republican (my father is a proud conservative). They were aghast at the match, incredulous that she could love a man who would vote for a McCain or Romney. She ended up leaving the meeting early, and came home citing the irony that she was too liberal for my father's friends but evidently too conservative-loving to be accepted among the bluest of the blue-hearted Democrats.
I've found this same kind of reaction in my experiences at Boston University. Granted, I have met plenty of open-minded people in New England. But I have also met people who cannot fathom why a person would join the Republican party—or be in favor of flat tax rates, or against entitlement programs, and so on. They turn conservatives into the "other," some foreign beings with whom they are convinced they could never find commonalities. The same is true in the South, where plenty of Republicans are quick to stereotype Northerners as yuppies with no understanding of the common man.
This frustrates me. As a child of parents with polar-opposite political positions, I am able to see both points of view. Even if I don't necessarily agree with both of them, I can respect the opinions they hold. People have reasons for what they believe, whether it be religion or personal experience or parentage, and we cannot reach those reasons and that understanding unless we talk. This is why I am with my friend on organizing opportunities for dialogue, on breaking past the gridlock that has stalled our political and social worlds right now.
We are quick to start arguments, but let us try starting conversations instead.
In our fragmented and disputing country, the answer is yes. We have a problem here in America with honest conversation. Our television screens and radio channels are full of blustering pundits and biased networks. We don't hesitate to bash the opinions of those we disagree with, without taking the time to deeply examine our own convictions and justifications.
A few weeks ago, my liberal mother—born and raised in Jersey—went to a meeting of Democratic women she had heard about in our town in South Carolina. The fact that there were even enough Democratic women to form a group in our Bible Belt town is surprising enough, but even more surprising was the derision my mother was met with in the group as soon as she mentioned she was married to a Republican (my father is a proud conservative). They were aghast at the match, incredulous that she could love a man who would vote for a McCain or Romney. She ended up leaving the meeting early, and came home citing the irony that she was too liberal for my father's friends but evidently too conservative-loving to be accepted among the bluest of the blue-hearted Democrats.
I've found this same kind of reaction in my experiences at Boston University. Granted, I have met plenty of open-minded people in New England. But I have also met people who cannot fathom why a person would join the Republican party—or be in favor of flat tax rates, or against entitlement programs, and so on. They turn conservatives into the "other," some foreign beings with whom they are convinced they could never find commonalities. The same is true in the South, where plenty of Republicans are quick to stereotype Northerners as yuppies with no understanding of the common man.
This frustrates me. As a child of parents with polar-opposite political positions, I am able to see both points of view. Even if I don't necessarily agree with both of them, I can respect the opinions they hold. People have reasons for what they believe, whether it be religion or personal experience or parentage, and we cannot reach those reasons and that understanding unless we talk. This is why I am with my friend on organizing opportunities for dialogue, on breaking past the gridlock that has stalled our political and social worlds right now.
We are quick to start arguments, but let us try starting conversations instead.