It is all on us to make a change by finding a solution of conscience before the solution of arms gets any worse. 

If we know how to use them, our national eyes lead us to act according to empathy first, without losing sight of ethical differences in our pluralistic democracy. This empowers us to see beyond appearances, like the one that leads to accusing those involved in abortion of murder. 

The Bible itself teaches that life does not even begin until the first breath, excluding murder altogether. But we cannot receive that knowledge when inhuman stereotypes and the negative isms are at work in us, or worse, if having already received it, we do not acknowledge it because ultimately we do not love those who we see as the enemies of conscience. 

How do we reach those of us enslaved to this undetectable blindness though still good people at heart, thinking they are saving an unborn living being, while losing sight of the actual living being they are putting at risk, the mother? In such blindness, they also cannot receive or will not acknowledge facts that would change their votes on gun laws, voting rights, and immigration policy, all concerning the welfare of actual living beings.


Whichever side we take on any issue, there is no excuse to misuse our conscience and hate rather than love – once we understand the principle of loving an enemy of conscience. It fully restores the generational eyes of our national conscience so we can piece together all historical events, freeing us from blindly piecing them around a few chosen events. 

Then, we need to be resolved to look into the eyes of every conscience and, when necessary, use the principle to reverse any misuse of sight on our part, no matter how long it takes for us to love them as fellow human beings and beyond, blind or not. For our success depends on whether we ourselves adopt the principle and draw others to it so they can see how to change their own minds and do so if they choose. We begin with the debate.

In my brief autobiography within the main story of The Mind of the Heart, an extremely controversial period sets the stage for the debate – What level of conscientious thought is needed to resolve the crisis of blindness in our present democracy?

This level must fully awaken our national conscience to its blindness and restore it, in order for it to take on a life of its own (symbolically or spiritually depending on our beliefs) and heal every individual conscience that seeks healing.