Certainty/Not

In my 20s, I was certain about so much, particularly God-stuff. I had many declarative sentences about what God wanted and such things. It was the 80s and brand of certainty was "in" thanks to the Reagan era.

Even in my 20s, though, I couldn't commit to that more evangelical/fundamentalist way of thinking. I always held back a little bit, mostly around tactics. I have an example.

I was definitely "pro-life" at the time (a term I dislike now, since I still like to think I'm pro-life, I just don't believe abortion is murder anymore). I had been to a meeting of some sort, some Christian group (that wasn't Lutheran Campus Ministry, where I was very active, even though they seemed a little soft on some issues), and abortion had been the topic. Someone from an organization that presented itself as offering help to women with unwanted pregnancies told us of the tactics used to lure these women into their "clinic" where they then did their best to convince them to carry the pregnancy to term. It was either a "Crisis Pregnancy Center" or something very like it. The advertising for these centers made them sound like they might offer abortions, or at least have information about them. It struck me as very deceptive. I recall writing in my journal something like, "how do you lead someone to the Way, Truth, and Life with lies?"

So that's where my certainty ended. At deceptive tactics. It's happened with more liberal or progressive organizations since. There are talking points to make the argument, and then there are aspects that are true but not mentioned because they aren't helpful to the agenda.

Whichever organizations, left or right politically, I cannot stand deception to sell a point. I'm not keen on bait and switch.

And that makes me a terrible activist. Activists require no little certainty in the cause. It's why I'm terrible at a political campaign. Campaigners have to have certainty that their candidate is the best option.

Twitter is full of certain people, some of them valued friends. The space allowed requires direct speech, blunt words. To get to the point, you need to be pointed. I admit, even when I agree with what's being said. I want to argue because the bluntness invites argument.

I also envy the certainty. I miss that feeling of being sure. I admire and am even thankful for activists, and still that assured posture is not one I can pull off.

This is confession. I'm not sure (there it is again!) if I need to change my ways or let my failures be signs to step away. I'm definitely not offering myself as a role model.

There are things that I feel strongly about, of course. Racism is sin. Billionaires shouldn't exist. Donald Trump is a terrible president. I don't see a reason to back away from any of these statements.


I'm the guy who finds most truth in ambiguity, even when I have strong feelings about some things. I believe that if racism is bad, then what I want to do is help convert racists to antiracists. Shouting at them doesn't seem a great tactic. If I believe billionaires shouldn't exist, I want a system that requires businesses to pay workers what they earn for the corporations, not pay some figurehead for managing a company of low wage earners. I don't see shaming them for their wealth to be a great agent for change. (Not that shame can't be or has never been an agent for change---but see, there I go again.) These are not easy slogans for the activist signs. They don't make great chants at the rallies.

On my best days, I accept that I am who I am and try to live my life in peace and love with all people. On my worst days, I want that certainty, that assured feeling back. I'm uncertain what to do about any of this.