A Failure to Compromise

When our boys started the inevitable drive to procure a cellular telephone of their own, we laid out for them the acceptable path that might lead to the successful satisfaction of their desires. They had to achieve a certain chronological age; they had to maintain a certain GPA; they had to be involved in some community serving organization; and, they had to achieve a definite maturity (with we parents as the sole arbiters). Both of our kids have attempted to negotiate these realities – regularly employing a tactic of claiming a desire for compromise. If, the logic goes, we expect them to be a specific number to be eligible for a phone and they are now a lower digit, the “correct” age falls somewhere in between. Failure to compromise would be “unfair!”

Innately, I like civic disagreement. It seems good to me to come together in the public square and argue for or against a particular matter in the hopes that resolution can be found. But that is not to say that there are no absolutes. In fact, I believe that our system works best when an unreachable compromise points to the fact that some issues are unresolvable. Vote no and move on. It has become heresy in the popular media to proclaim that a failure to compromise is, in fact, an action in itself. Many, filled to overflowing with good intentions, take action hoping to “fix” this bad outcome or another. The resulting imperfect “fix” ends up being more problematic than the problem. They have been lost to the dogma that preaches that all problems can (and should) be fixed.

If there is not a natural compromise, is it better not to compromise at all? And if fundamental tenets of another’s beliefs are compromised, has there been a compromise worth doing?

This column was published on Tuesday, December 6, 2011 in the Current in Carmel, Current in Westfield, Current in Fishers, and Current in Noblesville - http://youarecurrent.com/