Schisms: mental, national, and political

Because I cannot help but add my small voice to the fray: 

I read in a New York Times editorial this morning the coalescing response of the Left to the apparently unique frequency of mass killings in the US. It focuses on three primary contributing factors:

1.      “The easy, unfettered access to guns.

2.      The difficulty of obtaining health care for the mentally ill.

3.      The toxic and inflammatory political rhetoric in this country.”

My thoughts: 

Gun control

Sure, more restricted access is probably a good thing (the automatic weapons that tend to make their way into Mexico, facilitating their mounting death toll, come to mind), and the lobbying power of the NRA is kinda scary to me, but I feel that gun control is a small facet of a more complicated issue. So, es, but not the whole story.

Health Care

Sure, had Loughner found some treatment, through self-concern, familial pressure, or court-order, even if mostly ineffectual, he would have been much less prone to psychotic delusions leading to murderous rampage. This point is probably intended as a strike in favor of the health care bill, though I’ve read at least one opinion that suggested even increasing involuntary commitment procedures- scary! But, even in a universal health care world, treating the mentally ill is not like treating cancer. Science, even on a good day, is mostly inept at curing mental illness, and resorts to treating symptoms through therapy, or more commonly, medication. Most people are still against the idea of institutionalization, probably for very good reason, so then what would the Left suggest for the mentally ill?

One major problem I see here is that we can’t, as a society, agree on a moral foundation from which to confront mental disease. Not that there are no physiological factors in psychopathy, but I say there are moral, even spiritual, factors as well. And in a necessarily metaphysically neutral psychological climate even the mention of spiritual factors in cases like Loughner’s is rejected out of hand by professionals –more than rejected, it’s strongly criticized as unhelpful and damaging. But, mainstream news (NBC Nightly with Brian Williams, sorry no link) has no difficulty in reporting on Loughner’s apparent emotional demons. While “demons” may be used by news types in a more prosaic sense than technical, still, it is used because it resonates with the vast majority’s perception of reality. It’s like we acknowledge the reality of the force of evil, yet make no formal room for it.

It seems that this national schizophrenia in regards to the treatment of such horrors is as much to blame as is the lack of valid mental health care support. If mental illness, such as Loughner’s, is purely neurological, then it should be more likely to result in benign psychopathy –a person perceiving his/her self to be a butterfly, for example –as in a killing spree. This points to the presence of evil as a force in this case –which, I think, only the cynical, militantly rational, would deny. So, if evil is present and more than physical, then purely physical treatment is negligent. This seems to be a blind spot in society’s response to mental illness and killing rampages, not to mention our health care system. 

Politics

Yes, I agree that the current state of political rhetoric is toxic –often hyped and orchestrated to generate response with little to no concern for possible ramifications. Surely the Right is more overtly venomous, as the Left is gleefully noting, but that the Right carries all the blame is naïve. I say this, knowing that most people who know me also know that I have little patience or love for the bombast of Glenn Beck or the absurdity of Sarah Palin.  The case, to me, is analogous to a dysfunctional marriage where the husband is loud, rude, and bullying in his manner while the wife is passive, manipulative, and self-righteous in hers. 

Conclusion:

The alleged murderer apparently suffers from a severe mental schism, while our response to such people suffers from schismatic denial and avoidance of complete treatment, while our political dialogue suffers from a kind of marital schizophrenia, and only One Person I know is able to integrate the divided self –be it individual or corporate—the Same reconciled the greatest divorce – creature from Creator –through the Crucifixion, and more than reconciled, provided for unshakeable hope through the Resurrection. I believe that the further an individual or community distances themselves from Jesus, the more schismatic they become. And sometimes this divorce from the self results in treatment, sometimes in tragedy, and sometimes in quiet desperation.