The journey from there to here

Yes, this is related to my last article.

When the latest incident here at JoeUser occured, I feel that there were a number of people who wrongly perceived my fence sitting as being selfishly motivated. It was not selfishly motivated, but in fact, came about because I am simply sick and tired of being ripped apart.

It's not just here at JU; that's only a part of it. It's everywhere. As I mentioned in one of the previous articles on the subject, the minister of the church we have been attending and my fire chief have a long standing feud, and I am caught in the middle between a man I consider my friend and someone upon whom my loyalty is directly tied to my performance as a firefighter and soon to be first responder. This feud goes back to before I even heard of the existence of our small town and doesn't concern me; yet, there is a constant push from both sides for me to take sides on the issue.

Add to that the fact that our small town is literally torn apart by the factions from the two predominant churches, and, in fact, a split between members of the larger church. Each absolutely detests anything presented by another faction, and the arguments spill over into council decisions, fire meetings, Lions club meetings, and virtually every situation where two or more of our citizens have contact. As a result, we have no marshall, have been deprived of several grants that could have improved the standard of life and fiscal position of our town, and many families avoid the conflict in the church altogether by refusing to attend the churches in town.

Then there is my work as an advocate. There are two factions there, and they have no quarter, no room for compromise. Each is convinced of the rightness of his idea to the exclusion of others, and as a result, every question is met with a debate on the merits of each's position.

The common denominator of all of these conflicts is that I see validity to virtually all of the arguments presented. I believe there's room for compromise and not an "all or nothing" position. On this site, for instance, I was accused of cheerleading Brad, when, in fact, my comments were empathy for the exhaustion he expressed, something I have known quite a lot of, and for the work he has done to build his company. They were not an expression of solidarity for his decisions as an administrator.

My loyalty to Brad is based on the fact that I am appreciative for what he has done both in the creation of JoeUser and in improving my abilities as a writer. All I have to do is go back to the articles I wrote in my first few months at JU and the articles I've written in the past few weeks, and I see a substantial difference. There is an enhanced professionalism, I am more assertive in backing up my positions, and, as a result, I've become better educated as to the facts. I'm a better researcher, a more competent and confident person because of that, and I have no doubt this will have a serious positive effect on my personal life.

But that loyalty doesn't mean I don't have loyalty to Sabrina and Simon. In fact, since the idea was blown, I have no problem in stating that the reason I tried to sit on the fence is because I hoped it would blow over and Simon would eventually be reinstated. I didn't feel that adding gasoline to the fire would help that cause very much. Now, of course, there will be people who don't believe this at all, but frankly, Scarlett, I don't give a damn!

I am tired of being torn apart, tired of being forced to choose sides in everything. It's petty and juvenile, and I'd hope as adults we are above it. But if we're not, so be it. Just be careful, though, you may not like the side I choose.


Comments (Page 1)
3 Pages1 2 3 
on Mar 02, 2006
I will never ask you to chose gid,you are right I might not like your choice.
on Mar 02, 2006

I am tired of being torn apart, tired of being forced to choose sides in everything. It's petty and juvenile, and I'd hope as adults we are above it. But if we're not, so be it. Just be careful, though, you may not like the side I choose.

That is my position in a nutshell.

on Mar 02, 2006

I see choosing as life.

Even choosing to "sit on the fence" is a choice not to be on either side.  Kinda like making a third team.

I don't know why you are so shocked Gid.  Have you ever seen it any other way?  Most people won't recognize when they are wrong, admit it when they recognize it, or believe it could ever be any other way.

The problem with fence sitting imo (and that's all it is).  People from both sides end up thinking of you as an enemy.  You can't be trusted because you may secretly be rooting the enemy on....and lets face it, if you are on a "side" the other team is the "enemy."  Or you could at any time jump off the fence and help the enemy...so better to just make you pick or shoot you down.

And when it is personal I believe it involves a good deal of hurt.  Thinking you know someone is on your side only to have them say, "Well......" and choose the fence, is painful.  Makes you wonder if you were ever right about the person in anything.  Like maybe they just want to sit up there long enough to come down on the winning side.

Does that make sense?

I'm shocked at all the "shock" over it frankly.  It's seems like almost human nature.  At least in most of the humans I ever met.

on Mar 02, 2006

Thinking you know someone is on your side only to have them say, "Well......" and choose the fence, is painful. Makes you wonder if you were ever right about the person in anything

Oh that does hurt,  I've been there,  not a good place.....thinking someone was on my side, and thinking they believed in me,  and then to find out different...

 

 

Most people won't recognize when they are wrong, admit it when they recognize it, or believe it could ever be any other way.

I have to disagree with this,  I'd say SOME people won't recognize when they're wrong, and same for admitting that they're wrong.   I don't think it's MOST people,  however...that's just my opinion too.

on Mar 02, 2006
"

Add to that the fact that our small town is literally torn apart by the factions from the two predominant churches, and, in fact, a split between members of the larger church. Each absolutely detests anything presented by another faction, and the arguments spill over into council decisions, fire meetings, Lions club meetings, and virtually every situation where two or more of our citizens have contact. As a result, we have no marshall, have been deprived of several grants that could have improved the standard of life and fiscal position of our town, and many families avoid the conflict in the church altogether by refusing to attend the churches in town."

Wow,  sounds like kids on a playground!  It's my opinion that adults compromise,  for the good of the community, each other, and themselves....good Lord!  I'd never stay there!  like that song by Tom T. Hall,  "I Washed My Face in the Morning Dew."  it's about how this dude changed towns a few times because of the way the towns were run....

on Mar 02, 2006
True friends should not ask for you to take sides, I agree with that statement. Of course somehow your loyalty is going to be more to one person than the other, that is the truth and that is normal.

I've said that I won't take sides, in blaming one or the other, but I will agree that I'm surprised at the outcome. Brad did what he wanted to do and that's his perogative, some of us, or most of us might have handled it differently, or at least I would have, but that's just me. But it's his site, and his right to do what he wants. It just all boils down to what was perceived in the interaction, and how far of a boundary one will allow someone else to take. Someone commented on the "personal" tone of it, perhaps that's the straw that broke the camel's back.

But Gideon, I really feel that no one should blame you or go against you for what you believe. This is who you are, a testament to your individuality. I'm sure Whip wouldn't ask you to take sides either, she wouldn't ask anyone to take sides. However, I will say I was surprise at some of the other stuff I saw happening.
on Mar 02, 2006
Clearly I'm not privy to any of the interactions that you had outside of JU regarding this--but from what I can see, no one was asked to take a side, in fact, no one was even asked to discuss it.

It's one thing to sit on the fence--it's another to walk around and loudly proclaim that you are sitting on the fence and biting your tongue.
on Mar 02, 2006

It's one thing to sit on the fence--it's another to walk around and loudly proclaim that you are sitting on the fence and biting your tongue.

LW flamed about everyone here except you and Tex on another site.  She singled out Gideon especially.

on Mar 03, 2006

People from both sides end up thinking of you as an enemy.

And that's my problem, frankly. People who are unable to think in the abstract. They think of issues in terms of black and white, concluding that they are wholly right, which means the other is wholly wrong. It's what economists call a "zero sum game".

I'm not shocked at the fact it's happening, I'm shocked at the complete inability of so many people to compromise, or to give quarter to the other point of view. I'm shocked at the hatred that dominates people in this regard. It's not just true here, it's true in politics, religion, and just about every subject matter you can think of, and I'm sick of it. I will always take sides when I see it as important, but many of these issues I simply don't see as important enough to argue.

on Mar 03, 2006

I'm sure Whip wouldn't ask you to take sides either, she wouldn't ask anyone to take sides.

Actually, she called me out BY NAME on her other blog site because she felt I was "kissing Brad's ass". So, yes, she would and she did. That's what started this whole thing.

on Mar 03, 2006
LW flamed about everyone here except you and Tex on another site. She singled out Gideon especially.


Dr. Guy-- I know you don't like LW, and I honestly have to believe that that is your loss. But it makes me sad to see your snide comments about her riddled all over the site. She's gone. She's not coming back. There's no point in repeatedly kicking her when she's not going to defend herself.

As for everything elese, I'm going to take my own advice and keep my mouth shut. Honestly, if more people had done that, the incident wouldn't have gotten nearly so out of control as it did.

Actually, she called me out BY NAME on her other blog site because she felt I was "kissing Brad's ass".


Before I shut my mouth though, I'm going to see how far I can stick my foot into it. I'm pretty sure she blasted you after you wrote your "I'm sitting on the fence" article. She was hurting, and the public discussion of her time of pain didn't assist in the healing process.
on Mar 03, 2006

I'm pretty sure she blasted you after you wrote your "I'm sitting on the fence" article.

My article on "taking sides" was actually about larger issues than just LW. It is just that the timing of LW's dealings with Simon coincided. If you read the article, I spend MUCH more time talking about the conflict between my fire chief and the minister of the church we attended than ANYTHING online. I wasn't discussing LW's pain, in fact, at least one user didn't realize that was the issue I was talking about until well into the comments section.

I find it ironic, as well, that you should say this considering the subject of our discussion. LW has NEVER minced words with people during disagreements, and her response to me on this was no exception. Why does she get the right to be candid and forthright and the rest of us are supposed to kiss her rear end and tiptoe around her? Sure, she was hurting, but Brad was obviously very stressed as well...and Brad's feelings didn't enter into anyone's opinion, did they? In fact, when I expressed empathy for him being stressed, it was copied and pasted onto her blog to be used as ammo.

There are TWO SIDES to this story here...and in this case BOTH sides consist of people I have come to appreciate a great deal. It would have been as unfair to take sides with LW as it would to take sides with Brad.

on Mar 03, 2006
I will always take sides when I see it as important, but many of these issues I simply don't see as important enough to argue.


Gid if you don't mind a little constructive criticism here. That's the whole point of a lot of your articles yesterday...YOU.

You see the fault in your church members.

You don't think these things are important enough to argue.

You don't like being pushed off the fence.

But obviously these non-important things to you, are important to others. If you have a friend who is balls to the wall outspoken on just about every issue, then you can bet that person will not be willing to accept fence sitting when it comes to anything they perceive as personal. Whether you chose to be friends with that individual is entirely up to YOU. But you can't befriend a bird and then be upset when true to its nature, it flies away. Does that make sense?

While I agree with a lot of your observations, it seems you get easily side tracked with imperfection. Like the imperfection of others shouldn't touch your life, your thoughts, and certainly not your loyalty.

I don't know if you are really like this, or if I am misreading your intent. That's hard to discern on the net as I am sure you know. So if I am not getting the right picture, it isn't my intention to be hateful or mean.

Yes, people are gonna expect you to take sides. It's human nature. I think the only realistic thing to do is decide what YOU believe about the subject...why you believe it, and state it.

Otherwise you may come off looking like Switzerland.
on Mar 03, 2006

While I agree with a lot of your observations, it seems you get easily side tracked with imperfection.

Tova,

No, it's not just "imperfection". Here in town, I have a choice between churches that believe it's a mortal sin if I play "amazing grace" on my guitar, or one where I will have to face false allegations of abuse and neglect after every week if I DARE show my face there. If I go into town, I have a choice between those two sorts of churches, or churches whose doctrine directly opposes mine. What kind of choice is that? As I have said before, I have never been the subject of pure, true hatred until recently, and that hatred has come EXCLUSIVELY from people who label themselves "Christians". I've spent 35 3/4 years being "tolerant" of others' views, and it's about time a few people are tolerant of MINE.

As I said before, I have come to greatly respect Brad. While I wouldn't have made the same decision he did regarding Emp, IT WASN'T MY DECISION TO MAKE. Get that? NOTHING I could have said or done would have made ONE WHIT of difference!!!! NOTHING! I respected LW and Emp as well (at least up until that point), and the issue was, I didn't want to take sides AGAINST them! THAT'S why I chose to "sit on the fence".

I ALWAYS know what I believe, Tova. If I stated it everytime, I'd probably have NO friends. It's called "tact" or "diplomacy", and it's how we survive in society. The church issue came about because I was asked to defend the church's position forbidding the use of instruments in worship, a position I DO NOT believe, and can argue scripturally, but tolerated because I loved the fellowship of those in the church. I did EXACTLY what you stated, going to the church despite its imperfections, but the problems came about because I won't defend a doctrine I DON'T BELIEVE!

When people ask you to take sides, they're not asking for you to take sides; they're asking you to take THEIR side. And I believe there's enough hatred and division in this world already without throwing my piece into the fray. Didn't Jesus Christ say "Blessed are the peacemakers"? Why then, would it be reasonable or fair for a Christian to castigate someone who attempts to be a peacemaker for refusing to take arms?

I respect you a lot, Tova, but to tell the truth, you don't know enough about the specifics to make a judgement as to who's at fault with my current disillusionment with people in general. If you can't believe the statement that I have genuinely TRIED to get along with people with differing views, then I really don't know what else to say.

on Mar 03, 2006

If you have a friend who is balls to the wall outspoken on just about every issue, then you can bet that person will not be willing to accept fence sitting when it comes to anything they perceive as personal.

Yes, people are gonna expect you to take sides. It's human nature.

I disagree and stated as much in my own article.  Sure, acquaintances will expect this.  But true friends will not make demands of you (and that is what taking sides is all about - making a demand of you).  A true friend will respect your views and agree to disagree.  I doubt Mary Matlin and James Carville make such demands upon each other.  I doubt their marriage could survive if it did.

3 Pages1 2 3