Send us a text

Feeling tugged to take a side on everything? We zoom out from the outrage to ask a harder question: what actually matters enough to shape your day, your community, and your character. Starting with the government shutdown, we separate optics from impact—what really happens when federal spending pauses, why retroactive pay masks immediate pain for contractors, and how uncertainty moves markets more than ideology. It’s not financial doom, but it is a strain on real people who live invoice to invoice.

From there we trade the blame reel for first principles. Keynesian stimulus vs Austrian restraint isn’t just team sport; it’s a window into how much of the economy depends on government spending and why stalled budgets ripple through local life. But instead of sinking into cynicism, we pivot to a pragmatic lens: use stoic philosophy as a filter for meaning. Focus on what you control. Practice courage, temperance, wisdom, and justice. Treat headlines as indifferents unless you’re ready to act. If a story matters, make it matter locally—help a neighbor, support a small business waiting on checks, bring dinner to a new parent, sit with a family in hospice.

We also wrestle with the value of history. One of us sees it as prologue that clarifies who we are now; the other asks how it changes today’s choices. Together we sketch a path back to small-community agency—fewer distractions, clearer roles, deeper ties. Sports and shows can stay, but rank them behind relationships. Politics can stay, but only if it leads to service. Our friendship—a progressive Christian and a conservative atheist—works because the person across the table matters more than the spectacle on the screen. That’s the common ground we’re building: less noise, more neighbor; fewer hot takes, more honest work.

If this resonates, follow the show, share it with a friend who’s tired of the outrage treadmill, and leave a review with the one value you’ll practice this week. Your voice helps others find the signal in the noise.

©NoahHeldmanMusic

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com

©NoahHeldmanMusic

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com

Send us a text

Seeds don’t look like certainty—until you’ve seen them sprout a dozen times. We start with a backyard mystery of “trash tomatoes” and end up mapping how humans learn, trust, and pass on what we call truth. Along the way, we push into the hard question: when policies claim to be “for your own good,” are they honest stewardship or just control with better branding?

We explore how knowledge travels across generations, why some explanations (like demon possession) once felt as real as gravity, and how better models slowly replace them. That framework opens into a frank look at environmentalism: climate action versus ecological protection, wind turbines versus birds and whales, nuclear energy’s low carbon upside versus waste, and the messy ledger of chemicals such as glyphosate. We examine alarmism, the temptation of moral panic, and the populist soundbites that get attention while skipping tradeoffs. Rather than picking a camp, we choose specificity: clean air and water matter, tragedy of the commons is real, and policy is always a form of control—so let’s name it, justify it, and revise it as evidence changes.

What keeps the conversation grounded is our friendship across real differences—a progressive Christian and a conservative atheist testing each other’s assumptions without turning each other into villains. We don’t promise simple answers; we offer a method: pilot ideas, measure outcomes, admit costs, and protect what we can without pretending there are no tradeoffs. If you’re tired of shouting matches and ready for honest, practical curiosity about climate, ecology, and the politics in between, you’ll feel at home here.

If this resonates, follow the show, share it with a friend, and leave a review with one insight you’re taking into your next debate. Your notes guide future episodes and help more people find common ground.

©NoahHeldmanMusic

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com

©NoahHeldmanMusic

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com

Send us a text

What happens when a progressive Christian and a conservative atheist ask whether public schools are built to indoctrinate—and refuse to turn the question into a shouting match? We start with history, not heat, tracing Horace Mann’s citizen-making vision, the Prussian roots of standardization, and the slow drift from local classrooms to district, state, and federal control. If every layer sets the rules of what counts as “good citizenship,” then the fight isn’t over whether indoctrination exists, but over its aim, its authors, and its guardrails.

From there, we dive into the civics-shaped hole at the center of American life. We don’t need trivia champs; we need neighbors who understand why the Supreme Court exists, how laws move, and where power is checked. That’s where consensus gets tricky. Do we teach free speech as absolute or bounded? Is the Constitution a fixed standard or a living document? When higher ed prizes advocacy over analysis, K–12 inherits the impulse—and our politics turns into sports, all “shoot it!” with no sense of the playbook.

Parents aren’t spectators in this story. Every institution—public, private, church, team—indoctrinates. Choosing one is choosing a set of values, so the responsibility stays with us. We talk about showing up for local school boards, reading the standards that shape classrooms, and building critical thinking at home by asking why, early and often. The throughline is relational: connection before correction, mentorship over control as kids grow, and love as the durable bond that lets truth land.

If you care about education reform, civics literacy, curriculum battles, and raising independent thinkers, this conversation will sharpen your lens and widen your empathy. Press play, share it with a friend, and if it resonates, subscribe and leave a review so more people can find the show. Your take: who should decide what “good citizenship” looks like?

©NoahHeldmanMusic

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.comTh

©NoahHeldmanMusic

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com

Send us a text

Homelessness is one of America's most divisive issues, with battle lines seemingly drawn between compassion and accountability. But what happens when a progressive Christian and a conservative atheist sit down to tackle this thorny topic? Surprisingly, they find significant common ground.

Our conversation explores whether public assistance should come with obligations, and how government incentives might actually worsen the problem they're meant to solve. Drawing from personal experiences working with homeless populations, we examine the "homeless industrial complex" - a system where nonprofits and agencies secure massive funding while homelessness continues to rise. Are these organizations more focused on maintaining their existence than solving the underlying issues?

We challenge simplistic narratives from both political perspectives. The right-wing notion that homeless people "just need to get a job" ignores complex realities of mental illness, addiction, and economic hardship. Meanwhile, progressive narratives often highlight exceptional cases while minimizing factors like substance abuse that affect many experiencing homelessness. The truth, as always, lies somewhere in between.

Our most compelling insights emerge when discussing effective approaches. Incentive-based assistance works best when individuals view their situation as temporary. Shelter rules requiring sobriety create powerful motivation for behavioral change, while "housing first" models may inadvertently remove these constructive incentives. Programs like Habitat for Humanity demonstrate how ownership and personal investment create sustainable solutions that preserve dignity.

Beyond policy debates, we arrive at a fundamental truth: our personal responsibility to help others shouldn't depend on our political beliefs. As one host's grandfather wisely said, "The big take care of the small and the strong take care of the weak." Whether through community organizations or individual actions, we all share an obligation to our neighbors in need.

Join us for this thought-provoking conversation that moves beyond partisan talking points to find practical, compassionate solutions to one of our most pressing social challenges. Subscribe now and help us build a world where we're all living on common ground.

©NoahHeldmanMusic

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com

©NoahHeldmanMusic

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com

Send us a text

The line between faith and politics has always been contested ground, but in today's hyper-polarized climate, the question burns more intensely than ever: Should churches that promote political messages maintain their tax-exempt status?

This episode brings together two unlikely friends – a progressive Christian pastor and a conservative atheist – who begin with surprising agreement before diving into the nuanced reality. They challenge the very definition of "political," acknowledging that virtually any topic of significance can become politicized. When everything from human rights to immigration becomes a partisan issue, how can religious communities meaningfully engage with the world without crossing into forbidden territory?

The conversation takes a fascinating turn as they explore a radical reinterpretation of the Good Samaritan parable. Rather than simply being about helping those in need, they suggest its core message addresses our relationship with ideological enemies – perhaps the most relevant teaching for our divided times. The Samaritan wasn't just a kind stranger; he represented the despised "other" to Jesus's audience, challenging listeners to recognize their neighbor in those they've been taught to hate.

This insight frames their approach to controversial issues. We hear about a remarkable sermon series where topics like abortion, capital punishment, and war were addressed not through political posturing, but by creating spaces for real conversation and bringing in people with lived experiences of these issues. The goal wasn't to push a particular position but to humanize complex topics and demonstrate that behind every political talking point are real human beings experiencing pain.

The friends ultimately arrive at a powerful challenge: Can we overcome our deeply-held opinions to show genuine compassion? While most of us instinctively answer "no," perhaps the path to healing our divided world lies precisely in this difficult spiritual work – even if it leads to a metaphorical crucifixion.

Whether you're wrestling with how your faith community navigates political waters or simply looking for ways to maintain relationships across ideological divides, this episode offers both practical wisdom and profound insight. Subscribe now and join the conversation about living on common ground in an increasingly uncommon world.

©NoahHeldmanMusic

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com

©NoahHeldmanMusic

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com

Send us a text

When violence enters our political landscape, can meaningful conversation still survive? In this timely episode, recorded just hours after a high-profile political shooting, two friends from opposite sides of the ideological spectrum wrestle with one of America's most divisive topics: gun rights and the Second Amendment.

The heart of their discussion centers on a fundamental question: Does the right to bear arms truly serve as a check against government tyranny in modern America? The libertarian perspective argues that an armed citizenry provides crucial protection against potential overreach, while the progressive viewpoint suggests this reasoning has become dangerously outdated in an era of advanced military technology.

Their conversation ventures into fascinating psychological territory as they explore how moral barriers to violence function differently when confronting armed versus unarmed populations. Drawing on historical examples from Nazi Germany to Afghanistan, they examine how the human mind processes and justifies violence – and what this means for our understanding of self-defense, both personal and political.

What makes this episode particularly powerful is its context. Recorded immediately following a politically-motivated shooting, these friends must navigate their theoretical debate while acknowledging the very real tragedy unfolding in the news. Rather than retreating to partisan talking points, they find their way toward shared grief and common ground – not by compromising their principles, but by maintaining their commitment to authentic dialogue even when it's uncomfortable.

The conversation ultimately transforms into a meditation on friendship itself and how sustained dialogue across dividing lines might be our best defense against political violence. As one friend poignantly observes: "When you stop talking, you start fighting." Their example reminds us that finding common ground isn't about agreeing on everything, but about continuing the conversation even when – especially when – it's difficult.

Join us in creating ripples of understanding in a divided world. Follow and share this podcast with someone who thinks differently than you do – the conversation might surprise you both.

© NoahHeldmanMusic

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com

©NoahHeldmanMusic

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com

Send us a text

What happens when we question the stories nations tell themselves? In this thought-provoking episode, we tackle the complex question of whether American military operations worldwide ultimately help or harm US interests.

The conversation begins with an examination of historical context, specifically addressing covert operations like the CIA's Project Ajax in 1953, where America overthrew a democratically elected government. This launches us into an exploration of how official narratives often mask economic motivations behind military interventions.

We dive deep into uncomfortable truths about America's shifting alliances, exploring how we've sometimes supported groups we previously fought against based on changing geopolitical calculations. The discussion reveals how our fiat monetary system enables ongoing military spending without directly raising taxes - creating a disconnect between the true costs of war and public perception.

Perhaps most fascinating is our exploration of how personal identity becomes entangled with political narratives. We confront the psychological reality that we often resist certain ideas not because they lack merit, but because accepting them would challenge our sense of self or align us with groups we've defined ourselves against.

As we contemplate the potential "deglobalization" of the world economy, we wrestle with America's responsibility to other nations and how honest conversations might help us navigate an uncertain future. The episode concludes with practical insights on maintaining curiosity and intellectual humility when engaging with perspectives that challenge our worldview.

Join us for this challenging conversation that moves beyond partisan talking points to find genuine common ground on one of the most consequential questions facing our nation. Share your thoughts with us on social media - we believe that difficult conversations, handled with care, are exactly what our divided world needs most.

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com

© NoahHeldmanMusic

©NoahHeldmanMusic

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com

Send us a text

What happens when we peel back the layers of American mythology to examine the true foundations of our nation? Mark Charles, author of "Unsettling Truths" and a dual citizen of the United States and the Navajo Nation, joins us for a profound conversation that challenges conventional narratives about American history.

Charles takes us on a journey through the Doctrine of Discovery—a series of papal edicts declaring that lands not ruled by European Christian men were essentially "empty" and available for claiming. This doctrine didn't just enable colonization; it became embedded in America's founding documents and continues to influence legal decisions today. From the Constitution's "We the People" that originally meant only white landowning men, to the 13th Amendment that merely redefined slavery rather than abolishing it, our nation's framework contains contradictions we've never properly addressed.

The conversation takes a surprising turn as Charles examines Abraham Lincoln's legacy, revealing how America's celebrated president orchestrated the ethnic cleansing of Native peoples along the transcontinental railroad routes while simultaneously calling for national days of thanksgiving. These historical truths are difficult to confront, which is why Charles introduces us to the concept of historical trauma—affecting both victims of historical injustice and those who have perpetrated or benefited from it.

What makes this episode truly transformative is Charles' vision for moving forward. Rather than reconciliation, which implies restoring a harmony that never existed, he advocates for conciliation—creating a healthy relationship for the first time. By shifting our focus from power (the ability to act) to authority (the permission to act), we might begin to heal wounds that have festered for centuries. As Charles poignantly puts it through his grandmother metaphor, sometimes the most revolutionary act is simply acknowledging whose house we're in.

Whether you're a history buff, social justice advocate, or simply someone trying to make sense of America's complex identity, this conversation offers insights that will challenge your understanding and potentially transform how you see your place in our national story.

Learn more about Mark Charles here: https://wirelesshogan.com/

©NoahHeldmanMusic

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com