The "Baylor Family" has complained that its past leadership has been too divisive. Now it appears that Ken Starr, one of the most divisive characters in recent U.S. history, will be named Baylor's next president. Wow.
Like most of us who posted yesterday morning via blogs, notes, or status updates on Facebook, I wanted to be on top of the news. Like a cable news network full of ideologues, I wanted it known that I understood the greater implications of what this all meant before the next guy did. I understood the history of Ken Starr,of the Baylor controversies, and of what it takes to be a leader that unifies a divided constituency. I understood Ken Starr was not this guy.
Then the support from Mark Osler began making its way through the blogosphere. And then from Nadine Strossen, the long time president of the ACLU. Then President Bush, the one that all the progressives are now calling "the good one." Later I read that he endorsed President Obama's first choice for the U.S. Supreme Court, Sonya Sotomayor.
The tidbits kept trickling in and I realized that I may have been one of the only of my Facebook friends who had read the Starr Report, but beyond that, I didn't know a damn thing about the guy. What revealed itself throughout the day was the fact that Kenneth Starr is a polarizing and divisive for two reasons. a.) In a handful of high profile cases, he has been on the unpopular side of history. b.) People like you and me say he is.
The problem with prematurely labeling someone as divisive is that it infects the conversation. It demands people take sides before there are even any sides to be taken. On top of that, the supposed "divisive" person is faced with an added burden of proving they are not so on top of the already arduous task of the job set before them. It is unfair, and unChristian. You are a pastor and a public figure. I am a student studying to be the same. Regardless of whether we like it or not, we are always teaching. In this case we have taught that it is ok to cast judgement on someone we do not know, provided we inoculate ourselves from criticism by offering a tepid support for the decision to elevate that person to a position of leadership.For this I believe we all owe Judge Starr an apology and the benefit of the doubt.
I am a Lost fan as are you. But when it comes to the conversations about the show I am, well, lost. All the twists and intricate nuances do not interest me. Destiny or Choice? Boring. Plot doesn't fascinate me in Lost because there is always going to be something new around the corner. A hatch, a smoke monster, a wheel that throws you to last week. For me, these serve one purpose-- To reveal a character. Both what is deep within a character, and what is between characters. I am enthralled by the looks people give, by why they are angry or why they are scared, why they react one way in one situation and another way in another. In Lost, the past is essential, but there is always a new present to reveal that there is no such thing as a one-dimensional character. Most people contain multitudes, and all of them deserve the opportunity to make the most of a new reality.
Let's all give Judge Starr that opportunity.
hear! hear! grateful for your post.
ReplyDelete