gated
community.
Our
second son is busy with doctoral studies in biology. He's never been
active in politics and doesn't attend any church, but he reads widely across
the disciplines and samples opinion from many quarters. He seems
unconcerned with outside pressures to be conventional or unconventional.
I'm glad that he's dedicated to the wonder of the natural world but I hope
he continues to examine the social forces that don't register on his scientific
instruments.
Our
third child concentrates on her daily bread, something she shares with
the great mass of people on earth. She has no time for ideologies,
theologies, or philosophies and certainly none for marches or vigils.
She works nearly full-time at low pay and goes to school full-time, trying
to pick up a modest profession that will see her through. Her income
doesn't stretch beyond her rent and her cupboards are closer to empty than
full. She shrugs off issues of war and peace. "What will happen,
will happen," she says, "meanwhile I have to go to work." Which is
true.
The
attitudes and lifestyles of our three children give me pause and make me
think anew about this peace movement that so involves me. Our children
seem representative of many people in the great crowd. Their individual
struggles illuminate for me some the obligations that we in the peace movement
must assume.
Our
oldest, the high-income professional, is my living reminder that we can't
write off anyone, including the privileged of our society who hold wealth
and power. We can't assume they are foes or that they have no conscience.
We can't assume that we are more intelligent, more moral, or more compassionate
than they. We are obliged to find messages that touch their hearts
and ideas that challenge their perceptions. We must ask them to consider
that wealth is amoral and power corrupt, not because we in the peace movement
are immune to these |