I wasn't planning to do a blog entry today, and then I ran across this post. I think it encapsulates the essential difference between fundamentalists (not all of whom are religious) and everybody else:
"After Glenn Beck said “social justice is a perversion of the gospel” and a “code” for Marxism, communism, and Nazism, I invited him to a public dialogue to discuss the true meaning of social justice, which I said was at the heart of the gospel and integral to biblical faith.
In response, Beck promised on his radio show that “the hammer” would be coming down on me and my organization, and that he would devote a week of his television show to bringing me down. I took that as a “no” to dialogue.But I would still like to have this discussion with Beck..."
Jim Wallis is willing to debate; Glenn Beck is not.
To me, it matters a lot less whether you are "right" or "wrong" on a given issue, than whether you are willing to have a conversation about it. None of us has a lock on absolute truth or righteousness, but we all have a choice in whether to respect and engage with other points of view. Some people might see this as weakness. I see it as an opportunity to learn.