What conflicts do we perceive between the laws of the State and our religious convictions? How do we resolve those conflicts in our lives? In what ways do we assume responsibility for the government of our community, state, nation and world?

When faced with conflicts between actions of the government and our religious convictions, we sometimes feel our responses don’t bring results. We certainly would agree not to vote for those who support war or torture. The problem is that nobody did vote for those policies eight years ago, when the current president stated he didn’t believe in intervening and nation building. When it comes to paying taxes to support the military, we write to representatives and yearly meetings send minutes, but the response from representatives is “We’ve got to do this” and “ Don’t you support the veterans?” Costa Rica has quite a community of Quakers who have gone there specifically because they don’t have a standing military. So is it an option to just leave the country?

Sometimes we feel helpless and despondent. The temptation is to give up on the democratic process.

When we look at the situation without context and just see the things wrong, we become cynical. But when we look at the context globally and historically, we’ve made progress, even in peace. And the message has gotten through, despite institutions who tried to stop it. Progress has been made. In the 20th century, nonviolent revolutions covered two-thirds of humanity, including India, Africa, the Soviet Union and the United States civil rights movement.

We can even find hope in hypocrisy from our leaders. Our leaders have said they’re anti-war. Even though their actions demonstrate otherwise, at least they feel the need to give lip service to virtue.

We should remember that reaching out in kindness to those who don’t fit into norms is an important action. Greeting a beggar on the street as a real person is doing more than most of us ever do. Listening to someone, showing kindness, and giving attention are valuable responses.

How do we share our convictions with others? Do we express our opinions with courage, yet with love, mindful of the Divine Spirit within everyone?

Sharing our convictions often seems awkward, especially with beliefs that are meaningful. One Friend found it valuable to explain convictions in terms of
Quaker testimonies, which made them less threatening to others.

Sometimes, there is a temptation to forget that the person we are sharing with is more important than our convictions. When confronted with a  question from a friend about “Don’t you just love the Blue Angels?”, one Friend responded with her conviction that the Blue Angels glorified the military. This Friend worried that she was talking over her friend, arguing and not listening. We must find a better way to share our convictions than arguing or feeling threatened that someone doesn’t share our cherished beliefs.

We need to remember if they don’t care to hear our side, maybe it’s because we don’t care to hear their side.

How do we maintain our integrity when we find ourselves in a position of power? How do we respond when we feel powerless? Do we really respect and help those we seek to serve? Are we careful to reach our decisions through prayer and strengthen our actions with worship? Are we open to Divine leadings?

Some of us feel powerless when faced with a choice of candidates that don’t share all our positions. With a candidate, you get a package of positions, with many positions not clear. The training ground for candidates is dealing with news media and rallies. And when mudslinging starts, the issues get lost.

Sometimes our choices in an election feel as if we were choosing between having a hand cut off or a foot cut off.

What’s a Quaker to do?

As frustrated as we are with the political process, we recognize that elections are better than battles, and candidates insulting each other is better than them shooting each other. We are still saddened by the level of violence and lack of integrity in political communications.

What do we say to those who don’t want to vote at all because no candidate fits our convictions? Unfortunately, we can’t effectively boycott the political system by abstaining from voting at all. Non-voters are perceived as apathetic and the winning candidate still claims a mandate, no matter how few votes were gathered.

One Friend recommended, “Don’t vote for a selection, vote for a direction.”

For those tempted not to vote, one Friend recommended going to the polls to vote on referenda, and skipping the candidates. A vote for a referendum will have a direct effect. We have to remember the other ways of “voting” in our daily lives. We vote with our actions and our purchases. In fact, a ballot may not be the most important vote we make on election day.

Remember the importance of grassroots movement. When Martin Luther King, Jr. asked LBJ to support a voting rights act, LBJ told him he had already pulled in all his political chips for the civil rights bill. But after the nonviolent marches in Selma (and the violent reaction by police) focused national attention on the problem, the voting rights act was passed a few months later.

There are so many more avenues for grassroots movements now. Though we may despair that traditional protests don’t get attention, the new communication tools (blogs, social media, and so forth) provide new ways to share convictions and get our voices heard.

Politicians go where the wind blows. As do corporations – KCPL supports a referendum to require energy suppliers to use renewable resources because they are already doing so. They know where the wind is blowing. It’s our job to make that wind blow in the right direction.

Friends decided to close on an optimistic note.