“In another’s eyes
I’m afraid that I can’t see
This picture perfect portrait that they paint of me
They don’t realize and I hope they never do”
“In Another’s Eyes” — Garth Brooks and Trisha Yearwood

The second single from Trisha Yearwood’s compilation album of her greatest hits, released in 1997, “In Another’s Eyes” became a big hit, in large part because of an underlying truth that would take time to fully reveal itself. The song reached number two on the Billboard country charts and nearly reached the top 50 in year-end charts.

When Brooks wrote the song, and he and Yearwood recorded the song, both were married to other people, but by 2001, both had divorced, and a long-rumored affair became a public relationship, with the two marrying in 2005.

The song is written from the perspective of someone who is cheating in their marriage, but has not been found out…yet.

The perspective of everyone around is that the writer of the song is a good person, even “picture perfect” as the song describes. However, behind closed doors, one would have a very different perspective.

Perspective is a tricky thing in life.

Social media was taken by storm during the pandemic by a dress that some perceived as blue and black and others saw as white and gold due to the conditions in which the dress was photographed.

Much of the history and present actions of the world are highly shaped by the lens with which you view the event.

Now, in the case of the dress, there actually was a right and wrong. The original dress was black and blue.

However, much of life doesn’t have such a definite answer to perspective differences.

This past week, Israel was attacked by the terrorist group Hamas from Palestine. As of this writing, 22 Americans were among the more than 2,000 dead from both sides.

Messages came in from all over the United States in support of Israel, and let’s get it clear upfront that the Hamas act last weekend was absolutely a terroristic act and uncalled for in the ongoing conflict in the region.

Our president and our state’s governor were actually in agreement in calling the act one of terrorism.

However, already, Israel’s government, which receives annual military aid from the U.S. government - and other countries as well - is using its military resources to have not just evened the death toll, but the death toll of Palestinians is now higher than those who were killed by Hamas in its brutal surprise attack, just days prior.

To compare to another terrorist event, it took the United States multiple weeks to disrupt the Taliban government’s hold in Afghanistan after 9/11, let alone come near a similar death number, which wouldn’t be achieved until many months into the War on Terror and cost many more American lives on the way.

The perspectives on why and how Israel should be supported are quite diverse as well.

There are a significant amount of evangelical Christians who have misinterpreted the book of Revelations in the Bible to understand that an independent country in Israel is vital as part of bringing about the end of times narrative found in the book.

Except it’s not.

The Israel of the scriptures is not a political nation, but an ethnic one.

Similarly, there are many Jewish people in the world who are “religious” Jews and those who are “ethnic” Jews.

To really confuse you, it is perfectly normal that someone could be Jewish and attend a Christian church - or a Muslim temple. Jewish is a race and a religion, equally valid, separate from the other.

So, one can be opposed to antisemitic acts by white nationalist and modern Nazi groups and also support the right of Palestinians to inhabit the land that was originally drawn up in 1948, when Israel was so awkwardly created, with three separated parcels of land to be Palestine as Israel’s nation borders snaked through the middle of it.

While a lack of knowledge of Middle East politics or history could be the background of much of this misunderstanding, that’s exactly the whole problem in a nutshell.

The big argument that many have with Critical Race Theory (CRT) ideas (not actual CRT) being introduced in schools for young people is that they feel it “changes” history.

I was blessed to have a tremendous history teacher at Wolsey who pushed us to understand a whole-world view, but even Mrs. Scheel worked with the materials she had on hand, which most in the country used to understand history and civics.

Those materials are extremely focused on European history and American history through the eyes of those who are white, male, and Christian.

Even the coverage of things like slavery, indigenous history, women’s rights, and civil rights through American history were viewed through the eye of a white Christian male viewing those things.

Did you know that the first Black man to walk on the North American continent was nearly 100 years prior to the first slave? Not something taught when we’re glorifying a guy who never even reached the mainland of the United States as “discovering” the area.

Mayans that were in south Florida have recorded history that says that the first “European” that they encountered was a Black man, a member of Ponce de Leon’s expedition team into what would become Florida, in 1513.

Similarly, the words written about women’s rights and civil rights are written heavily from those in the position whose “power” was being threatened, and you only have to take the emphasis on non-violent protest and glorification of such acts to see that view. While non-violent protests are given credit for making changes, the extremely violent and deadly reactions by those in power are minimized.

Heck, how many still believe that the Battle of Little Bighorn was an heroic U.S. military battle, and not the result of reaction to the U.S. military and government forcing indigenous people out of the Black Hills in order to harvest the gold in the area.

The government actions led to multiple tribes that worked independently, or in small alliances previously, to all come together in a way that overwhelmed Custer’s 7th Cavalry.

Instead of seeing the response of U.S. actions leading to the response that led to Custer’s death in battle (along with three of his other top four-ranked officers in the regiment), history books explain the Wounded Knee Massacre as a response to Little Bighorn rather than further aggression by the U.S. government.

Looking at history and present world events with the perspective of seeing through the eyes of all involved allows us to truly find justice in those events - and the true justice, not just what would be most acceptable to social media.

Many incorrectly cite Micah 6:8 in the Bible, stating that they “love justice” and want to see it for all.

The Hebrew word in the verse associated with justice is an action word. The translation is to “do justice,” in other words, supporting justice for all requires more than a social media post of support, a ribbon sticker on a vehicle, or even a donation to a cause.

Instead, doing justice requires evaluating perspectives to ensure that proper effort is given to get justice for those who deserve it, even if those people might challenge personal beliefs or comfort levels. That’s when our actions “in another’s eyes” can be seen for what they truly are instead of what we try to portray on a scrubbed social media and exterior facade.