13 Notes & Comments

In the year ahead, for example, America will continue the discussion on whether all of our citizens are to be granted, as a matter of right, access to a reasonable level of health care.

The leading voices of talk radio will not be constrained by considerations of civility; neither will those who remain indifferent to the plight of the uninsured or whose concern is the protection of privilege.

When the case is made for assuring that health insurance is extended to every American, I want it to be made with conviction and “without restraint.” Such is the American way.

Our political system is constructed on the assumption that it will involve an intense exchange of political views. And as a religious liberal, I attach special importance to impassioned debate. Precisely because I am a religious liberal, I know that I am inclined — as are others who share my religious outlook — to avoid absolutes, to reject fundamentalism in all its forms, to be open to subtlety and nuance and to see the other side of issues. These are generally good things, but they can also mean that when I advocate for what I believe, I do so in a tepid way.

The challenge for religious liberals is to argue passionately for their beliefs, even as they recognize that they might not always be right. It is to be certain, but not about everything. It is to champion their values with conviction, even as they know that good people may have conflicting values on the same matter.