We need more discussion, not assumptions or demonization

I support capitalism, a strong military, an interventionist foreign policy, the rule of law, protection of the environment and wildlife, gay marriage, gun control and equal access to education, health care and economic opportunity. I’m a feminist and a nurse with an MBA. Having prioritized certain policies, I can support a candidate who takes positions with which I disagree. Am I a Democrat or a Republican? It shouldn’t matter.

I am comfortable being difficult to define, something I also appreciate in others, and am sympathetic to many sides of every issue. Chalk that up to being the child of divorced parents, from two very different cultures, letting me love people of different belief and value systems, long before I understood their politics.

Having commonality with both parties, I should be embraced by all. But people prefer to focus on differences, illustrating the fear, meanness and combativeness permeating our society. Few ask what I believe about an issue or why I support a candidate, content to make assumptions based on imagined party affiliation.

Parties, while great vehicles for fundraising, enable ignorance, laziness and labeling. If we can just vote along party lines, we don’t have to learn about candidates’ positions. Perceived party affiliation differences allow us to limit conversation with our friends. Few believe that we all have the same noble goals, with different ideas about how to achieve them, so parties let us know whom to demonize, which seems to be information of the utmost importance. CHERYL MOORE

Squirrel Hill