It is sad but interesting that writer Julie Mannell is compassionate to all except Sam Oosterhoff because she makes assumptions about his beliefs without actually talking to him. At least I will assume that she has not talked to him as she has him pegged by modern stereotypes, which are still stereotypes.
Why cannot Julie have compassion for one of the least accepted groups in our society, people who believe like Sam?
Is he anti-anything? How do we know? We only know from talking to an individual. I believe Sam might shock her as a very compassionate person. Just because someone may disagree with someone else does not make them wrong nor does it make them evil. And yet Julie has proclaimed him as such. Maybe taking a positive approach would be more compassionate. What is he for? Doesn’t he have any redeeming qualities?
And at the same time, she has proclaimed that the majority who voted for Sam are also hateful evil people. After all, if they voted for Sam, then they must be just like him.
Julie, it really is time that you are compassionate for all, even those you disagree with. Selective compassion is not compassion at all. It is just making choices in our beliefs as to who we should care about. Your choices are not any more correct than anyone else’s.
Assumptions we should realize lead to beliefs that are false and judgemental, not objective and true. The very heart of liberalism used to be an acceptance of all. I guess that day is past just like the Comfort Maple is passing as well.
Charles G Pedley BA MSED MUI