Freedom of Peace

It was Sunday - Superbowl Sunday - and I should have known better than to attempt a run to Trader Joe's in Downtown Culver City. Sunday is a big shopping day, and the traffic in both the store and the adjoining parking structure is enough to make you think twice about how much you really need those sliced almonds or that special loaf of goat cheese.

I was just going for butter, and so I lowered my cap and ran the gauntlet of do-gooders and petition holders that seems to double on the weekends. "Excuse me, could you help the ACLU?" they asked. Not today, I'm just here for the butter, and back to football. "Could you sign a petition?" Nope, butter. Just butter.

To Trader Joe's credit, their identity is built around grass roots activism, integration with a community, and a "real folks" attitude. While the big chains have posted signs indicating that they want nothing to do with petitioners or charity solicitations, TJ's kind of lets it slide if it's not too much of a bother. Doing time in the Trader Joe's parking lot is almost a modern rite of passage for a young idealist - support a cause, and go out and get barked at, argued with, hassled, bored by sidewalk preachers, and see if you can keep your idealism intact. You have to give them credit, they're trying to make a difference. I've done a few rallies in my time, activism and issues aren't something I shy away from.  But today, I was going to have a moment.

I got out of Trader Joe's and hunkered down for the run to the car. Unbelievably, the amount of petitioners had somehow increased, but I was ready for them. "Pardon me, sir … do you support …." I had already begun shaking my head, counting the steps until the stairwell.

… a woman's right to CHOOSE? YOU DON'T SUPPORT A WOMAN'S RIGHT TO CHOOSE?" The words echoed as I hit the first step, as the petitioner escalated, repeating "… DON'T SUPPORT A WOMAN'S RIGHT TO CHOOSE?" echoing up the stairwell as I hit the first landing, grateful to be away from the righteous anger being hurled at me. I was grateful to get in my car, the compression of the door closing popping the bubbled echo of my betrayal.

I just wanted butter, and, for today, not get badgered to sign a petition or endure earnest small talk from somebody who's out to change something. I wanted a day off. Worse, the issue is one I actually care a great deal about, and I did nothing to change the notion that I was just walking away from it.

Then I thought: what if that person was pro-life? I would be hearing "Baby-Killer" or some equivalent, which would probably provoke a call to the police. What if it was a religious fundamentalist? Trader Joe's probably would have politely asked them to take their act elsewhere, but was there any substantial difference? Would I tolerate the same tone and abuse from a person who held views that conflicted with mine?

The Constitution guarantees freedom of speech, so that dialog about the direction that our country takes can be a continuing evolution of consensus and discussion. It's very important, yet allowing the public forum to extend to all corners of our public life is becoming burden for everyone. Nobody answers their doors any longer without looking out the window. We screen our phones to avoid the 90% of calls that are solicitations, and robocalls, and surveys. We avoid eye contact, we duck our heads and race to the car, trying to hold on to a minute that is cause or crisis-free. In Culver City, I avoid Trader Joe's on weekends not only to dodge the crowd, but also to avoid the hassle I get from all the petitioners.

Speech without silence becomes cacophony - an anarchy of noise, conflicting ideas and opinions where no one wins. To me, freedom of speech has a partner - freedom of peace. The point where we understand that even though we don't all have the same opinion, that difference doesn't not give you the moral authority for verbal assault. There will always be people who put a toe over the line to gain an edge in the name of their cause - by any means necessary. If you are looking to win hearts and minds, however, I would suggest that the game has changed: you have to bring the peace. The vision you are presenting must present the prospect of less conflict, less invasiveness, more freedom.

Public discourse is an important part of our democracy, but there has to be a willing partner in that conversation, not some issue-based ambush every time I leave my house. In this case, the petitioner didn't understand that I completely support a woman's right - and man's, and child's - right to choose what they want and don't want in their life. Yet, I assert my right, and fully support the right of all our citizens to make their own choices in silence.