delusion of inclusion

"Inclusion" is definitely the current PC trend that creates a lot of debate. It is the mantra of the political left and the target of attacks of the political right. Each accusing the other of vile virtue. Generations look at each other in dismay. People are feeling threatened and afraid, angry, and hopeless.

The problem seems to be that "inclusion" engenders confusion and this ambiguity fosters delusion.

If "inclusion" means that we should be welcoming of others different from us, then the right and the left both agree on and advocate inclusion. Most fair minded people see hospitality and extending open arms to people who do not look or even think like they do as a good thing. While an openness to observable diversity may not be a natural response of humans according to sociological research, civilized societies see virtue and benefit in embracing diversity.

The rub seems to come in when we apply "inclusion" to society's exercise of rights, who has what right to do what? The left applies the notion of "inclusion" to individual rights and this creates situations that offend people on the political right. For example, if we include the rights of customers to be served even if the shop keeper does not wish to serve them, the left sees this as "inclusion" and the right sees this as a violation of the rights of the shop keeper. Consideration of the rights of the shop keeper are NOT considered "inclusion".Thus, the rights of both can not be "included" at the same time. The same occurs with "including" the rights of women to abort their child for any reason, which excludes the rights of the unborn child. Granting illegal immigrants the right to work in the US, violates the rights of citizens to those jobs. Allowing males who think they are females to visit locker rooms of girls who have a right to privacy from having to shower with males viloates one group by including the wishes of another. And on and on and on ....

When we are dealing with some aspects of "inclusion", such as rights, we find that including one party excludes another and vice versa. Thus, "inclusion" is only an illusion because it is impossible to be "inclusive." We can shout at each other all we want. We can cycle through one political party after the next, but we will not resolve "inclusion." Yes, we must have mechanisms to resolve the conflict of rights, but making "inclusion" a virtue of society where it is impossible is just plain insanity. Our founding fathers found a way to protect rights of citizens from government's over reach, but how we deal with each other's self-serving desires that infringe on others requires way more than laws.

Where are the grown ups when we need them?