One of the really odd things about the nature of ideas is that, within any well developed system of thought, there are arguments for and against any given political issues.
This observation is not really a paradox. A paradox is a conflict in base principles. My observation is simply a recognition of the multidimensional nature of logic and the universe itself.
On pretty much all major issues, you will find Conservative arguments for and against the issue, progressive arguments for and against the issue, Christian arguments for and against the issue, Libertarian Arguments for and against the issue and so on.
Societies tend to have a few foundational principles. The real divisiveness happens when intellectuals inject paradox or conflict into these foundational principles.
Anyway, I wrote up an example, but realized that our public schools and universities simply do not give people the training to appreciate or understand subtleties in arguments.
The post started with a foundational principle. It then showed how one could argue both side of an issue from the principle.
I despaired. Our modern education system has created an image driven culture that would simply cue off the examples and fail to notice that I am actually trying to discuss the way that different ideas lead.