"What kind of person will you show yourself to be?"  Several years have passed since I put this question to myself for the very first time.  One of the more challenging dimensions of the question is that it is not concerned with how others respond, whether one's expressions will be rewarded or punished, or whether there is even anything to be gained by such display.  The assumption within even the asking of this question, of course, is that honest self-expression is possible.  How, for example, can a fish show itself to be a fish, if it is not within some sort of container or body of water?  Similarly, how can a man of faith show himself to be a man of faith when he is surrounded by people who apparently have no idea what faith is?
      Taking the question a bit further, how can one who is committed to inclusion show one's self to be a person who believes in inclusion, when surrounded by people who know nothing beyond competition?  How can a person who cares for the welfare of others show one's self to be such a person, when surrounded by capitalistic minds content with using up the strengths and abilities of individuals and then casting them aside?  How can a generous man survive within a community of narcissists?  How can an honest statesman survive psychologically and ethically when surrounded by dishonest profit-mongering politicians?
      Considering the problems and implications produced by over-population and the increasing convergence of diverse languages, cultures, religious practices, political opinions, and economic strategies, it is more imperative than ever that constructive dialogue become standard practice within virtually every social and societal setting.  I have often heard it said that "everyone matters," but if we do not take the time to hear each others' stories, to listen to each others' hearts, and to respect each others' minds, the blessings which could arise from a widespread practice of "everyone matters" will never manifest.  It simply is not enough to say "everyone matters" if one is not also willing to live as if that statement were true.
      I suppose what I am describing here, is a loudly screaming need for a particular paradigm shift toward what I term "relational individuality."  
      Within the paradigm of relational individuality, communities nurture individuals no matter how unique or

eccentric those individuals may at times appear to be.  Competition is difficult to maintain within such a paradigm because those who would otherwise be labeled winners, expend great effort to encourage those who would otherwise be labeled losers.  As I often remarked to a particular professor while accomplishing a Masters degree in Theological Studies, "it's not over until everybody wins."  As long as there are still losers, still people with unmet needs, still individuals without communities and communities that fail to nurture individuals, no one has truly won anything at all.  As true as it is that "no one wins a war," freedom for one individual lacks integrity if that freedom is not equally available to every individual.  Tolerance of misconduct by law enforcement that is perhaps tolerated because it is only directed at members of marginalized populations, allows the possibility of eventual misconduct toward one's self.  A lack of accountability generally corresponds to a lack of stability within any human society or civilization.  If there is no way to address wrong-doing, wrong-doing will soon be the only kind of doing occurring.  
      None of this needs to happen and none of this will happen, however, if all together we stand up and say "no."  Within the movie "Independence Day," the wife of the president of the United States (the "First Lady") is rescued by an exotic dancer who loves her son so much that she is willing to be an exotic dancer, if that is the only way to provide for her son.  Had that First Lady previously worked to remove exotic dancers from that community for reasons of moral conservatism, there might not have been anyone to rescue her.  No one can anticipate when one may need the assistance of the one who would otherwise be considered to be an enemy, to be inadequate, to be of less worth, or to be for whatever reason the wrong person from whom to receive assistance.  
      Whether or not any particular person is willing to admit it, humanity remains one enormous family and each and every person really does matter.  Leaving any person in need is as injurious to the body of humanity as refusing to treat a badly cut finger simply because the little finger of the left hand is used less frequently than all the rest.  The pain, possible infection, and loss of blood will be felt by the rest of the body, whether or not the body is at all interested in the fate of the little finger.
      In a similar way, it is imperative that we remember that a person is a person is a person and that every person must have legitimate ways to get needs met, if life, love, and wisdom are to ensure the ongoing survival of humanity, individually and collectively, on planet earth.  By the grace of that which is truly God, all good things are still possible–if we will simply get busy and do them.