Open-Ended

I don't particularly like to make Meandering Thoughts into Meandering Political Thoughts, but those of you who know me well know that I can only remain a-political for about five minutes, then it somehow seeps out. I can't help it; I'm opinionated (ok maybe an understatement). Well today kids is going to be slightly political, so brace yo'self, you red state-ers.
I'm just about finished with Savage Beauty, a biography of my favorite poet, Ms. Edna St. Vincent Millay. I love her. She lived what might be one of the craziest lives I've ever had the privilege of reading about and was a Pulitzer-winning poet. She was also fairly political and the views that she took are now wildly considered to be "right" in the context of history: she was "right" to fight against the isolationism in America before WWII, "right" to worry about the dangers of Hitler, "right" to be arrested protesting for a women's right to vote. Today we champion those views; at the time they were considered radical and often subversive.
Being the self-obsessed person that I am this had me wonder, what sorts of opinions that exist now will be considered "right" 50, 75, 100 years down the road? What sorts of battles will we look back on and say, "Oh gosh I can't believe we fought for/against that. How ignorant/intolerant/cynical/optimistic/greedy/generous were we?"
This morning in the Washington Post there was an article sort of answering my simmering rhetorical question. This editorial of course dealt with the big issue of today, gay marriage. I recommend reading it, as it makes valid comparisons between the struggle for interracial marriage and the struggle for gay marriage. (link is attached)
"Almighty God created the races, white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix."
When was this said? 1959. My father was nine years old. In Alabama? Nope, Virginia. By whom? A high-ranking judge. This was less than 50 years ago, and now a-days we sigh and say, "Well we really didn't believe that. I mean we all know that it was nonsense. We're smarter than that now." But are we? How? Is it right because it's a popular view, or is it right because it is what should be intrinsically? I can't say I know, I only question.
"If we maintain the open-mindedness of children, we challenge fixed ideas and established structures, including our own...We don't find demons in those with whom we disagree...If we are open, we rarely resort to either-or: either creation or evolution, liberty or law, sacred or secular, Beethoven or Madonna, we focus on both--and are fully aware that God's truth cannot be imprisoned in a small definition. Of course, the open mind does not accept everything indiscriminately....It does not absorb all propositions equally like a sponge; nor is it soft...the open mind realizes that reality, truth and Jesus Christ are incredibly open-ended." -Brenan Manning Ragamuffin Gospel