When I sat down to write this column, I wanted to write about religion and politics – the topics nearest and dearest to me. But I can’t do that. You’re not interested, if what’s trending on Yahoo is indicative of what’s trending at Grand Valley State University.

At the time I sat down to write this, Sandra Bullock, Khloe Kardashian and Sarah Gellar topped the list of what was trending on Yahoo. A minute later, TNA Wrestling unseated Gellar for the third spot. Hollywood, or rather, fantasy, consumes our thoughts.

Whether you’re talking about actresses, a fake sport or the Walking Dead, the topic of the day is almost always chimerical – existing only in the mind, not in reality.

What is it about reality that we fear so much? Why is it that the topics of religion and politics are considered taboo? I have a theory, but first a definition of terms is in order.

Religion deals with a belief in God, his perfection, his will for our lives, our obligation to obey him, a system of reward and punishment, a general accountability for our actions to God and it has much to say on the subject of morality.

George Washington, the father of this country, said, “Let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion.” But forget about what Washington said. Simply by alluding to an 1828 definition of the term “religion” penned by Noah Webster, controversy has ensued. We haven’t even begun the discussion and it’s already over. Doesn’t that strike you as peculiar?

But I’m not done. We have yet to define politics. Politics, in a nutshell, deals with the ethics concerning regulation of a nation or state to keep itself safe, at peace and prosperous. We’re talking defense and independence, a robust economy, protection of the citizens’ rights and, as Webster concluded his definition, “with the preservation and improvement of their morals.”

I have already stated things to you that seem impossible – things that are simply incompatible – not by giving you my opinion but by reading a couple definitions. I can already hear the cries of “separation of church and state” rising from the Allendale and Pew campuses, despite the likelihood that nearly every one of those cries comes from people who couldn’t even tell you the origin of the phrase that so soon appears on their lips when the topics of religion and politics come up.

Thomas Jefferson said it but you won’t find it in the Constitution. In fact, it was actually written in his reply to the Danbury Baptist Association in Connecticut, a group that wrote Jefferson upon his inauguration in 1801. The DBA wrote Jefferson out of fear that the Bill of Rights would be interpreted by some to imply the government supplies Americans their rights, not God. These men were convinced that God gives humans their rights and that the government is merely there to protect those rights.

But these are all things we’re woefully ignorant of, and I believe it’s due to our reluctance to talk about religion and politics. We take the easy way out and say these topics don’t merit the time of day. And if you should happen to bring them up, don’t mix the two whatever you do.

Why are we reluctant to talk about religion and politics? Because we’re afraid of reality. The truth makes us uncomfortable, so much so that we claim ignorance, sounding very much like Pontius Pilate when he rhetorically asked, “What is truth?” We prefer the chimerical.

Grand Valley State University is dedicated to the liberal arts and we pride ourselves on critical thinking. One of the chief tenets of critical thinking is to amass all the good evidence you can find before making conclusions. I’m afraid we don’t apply those same standards of critical thinking to the topic of religion. We quickly dismiss it in elementary fashion when we haven’t even begun to research the question. We’re prejudiced. We’re proud.

Religion and politics are often avoided like the plague because we assume it will just spark controversy. We won’t agree, so why bring it up? Well, again, presumptions and assumptions fly in the face of critical thinking and they should be mitigated as much as possible. But even if we don’t agree on these issues, that isn’t sufficient reason to avoid the topic altogether. If we’re so educated, it seems that somewhere along the line, we would have learned to be civil toward one another, even toward those with whom we disagree, regardless of the topic. I’m not insisting we all agree on the issues; I’m suggesting we have the conversation.

We have a long history of men who fought and died to protect our God-given freedoms. We should have conversations that concern religion and politics. And if your main stance on the subjects has the tendency to shut them down as quickly as they were introduced, then you should probably reexamine your stance. At GVSU, we believe in the free marketplace of ideas, where each idea is welcomed because we know the cream will rise to the top. Don’t let narrow-mindedness deny religion or politics a seat at the table.

Webster said politics is a subject of vast extent and importance, yet we rarely talk about it. We talk about religion even less.

But maybe they’re not important. Let’s go to the movies instead, and when we get home we can cheer on John Cena. Escape reality all you want but, in so doing, realize that the beautiful reality that was gift-wrapped by God, handed to you and protected and preserved by those who gave the last full measure of devotion is crumbling and disappearing.

This column wasn’t meant to be a one-way conversation. If you would like to share your thoughts, send me an email [email protected], find me on Facebook www.facebook.com/keith.eichholz, reach out to me on Twitter https://twitter.com/KeithEichholz or post a comment below.