Short Writing Assignment #2

Kathleen Parker’s article, “Seeking Balance in an Either-Or World” describes to the reader her take on liberal and conservative extremes. Although she can easily pick a side, she often finds herself straddling the fence when it comes to issues such as abortion. First, she relates that as a columnist, many people expect her to choose a particular political view, because “It depends” shows and indecisive nature. She continues about the nation’s abortion policy, pushing for a pro-life position, but later returning to the unjust policy of motherhood forced by the government. Parker discusses many people’s desire to compromise these issues, stating that the country needs more practical education standards, teaching students the advantages and disadvantages of abortion as effective birth control. She conveys her disgruntled attitude towards the population caught in the boundaries, because unlike her, they have a clear opinion. Parker introduces new voice for those wandering down the middle path, John. P. Avlon. Avlon has presented centrism, the idea that discards both ends of a concern, and instead supports concepts such as motive, civility, and a practical standpoint. Parker articulates that extremist have been in control of the country long enough, and that Independents are gaining more support across the nation.
Parker’s assessment is one of a strong voice, and she had many valid points, especially for a person who cannot choose a particular side in a political situation. She brings forth many aspects of the abortion topic; however, she never seemed fully back her opinion, whether it be from a pro-life or pro-choice standpoint. By presenting centrism into the text, Parker engaged the reader with the idea that many Americans are, like her, straddling both sides, and therefore representing the “moderate” half of the United States population. Avlon’s claim that the inflexibility of the extremists creates a deadlock or causes irrelevance convey to the audience that although a person may not choose particular sides, their open-minded angle is still a means for opposition.
In my experiences, I have found many of Parker’s claims to be true. I have never been a person to choose a side in a debate, because I could find reasons for both sides to be true. I have always wandered down the middle path, and until now, I had never heard of centrist ideals. I always assumed that everyone had always been on either side, defined in black and white. Although extremists will object to centrism as being patriotic, I believe that being able to see both sides can enable you to appreciate the morals of any political figure, and also make decisions for the best outcome, rather than being set in one frame of mind that may not always be the right path.