Changing the image on a dollar bill has been floated out there in the GOP debate.

I don’t think it can be stopped.

So how do you react?

We have two paths before us.

1. Reject any change because it’s political and untraditional (this was Carly’s response in the debate).
2. Accept, even celebrate, the change. It seemed all the others chose this path.

Which option do you choose?

If you choose the first, then please understand that too often it escapes the Right’s notice that many of the Left’s changes have at least a few virtues embedded in them. Two examples come to mind: allowing same-sex marriage in the name of love and tolerance or changing the mascot of Washington’s football team in the name of sensitivity and moving forward. Strong arguments have been made for and against these changes. No, please don’t think I’ve gone soft on SSM; I haven’t (here, here, and here).

But if the Right ignores the virtues, they come across as stubborn, nonintellectual, and bigoted, even when they feel in their hearts they are not.

In my view, I see the virtue in honoring a woman involved in our Founding by placing her on a bill, even though I believe the timing is politically motivated to help Hillary because this issue could have been done, say, back in 2008 or 2009. The DNC is turning 2016 into the Year of the Woman, believing perhaps that Carly won’t win the nomination (and she probably won’t), but Hillary still will, despite her troubles.

But above the political fray, surely there is at least one woman in our history who deserves the national fame today.

If you accept the second option, which bill? The one with Hamilton ($10.00) (the Treasury Department is choosing this one)? Jackson ($20.00)? A little humor: President McKinley is on the $500.00; President Cleveland on the $1000.00; President Madison is on the $5,000.00; Salmon P. Chase on the $10,000.00; and President Wilson is on the $100,000.00 bill.

Seriously, though -- which bill?

And which woman? No one after the War of 1812? After that time? During the Civil War, like Clara Barton? A prominent abolitionist? An even earlier abolitionist, say, from before the Revolution? I prefer a woman of the eighteenth century or early nineteenth, not later than President Jackson.

In the name of winning elections, fixing the budget and taxes and entitlements, defunding Planned Parenthood (to name only those few), and not letting the Left and Hillary mock us from here until then, we may have to honor a woman who contributed mightily to our founding. For me, Abigail Adams is not a difficult choice -- and I don’t make it reluctantly or grudgingly.

Whichever way you go, please see at least one virtue in the other side’s argument. It’s not a bad thing to listen first and then begin your side of the discussion by saying, “I see your point.” (Then if necessary repeat it to show that you understand it.) “But may I offer a counterpoint or another storyline … another narrative?”

I do this in my classes all the time. It works. Mental light bulbs often go off because we have the stronger evidence, arguments, and conclusions.

James Arlandson has written a supernatural historical fiction about his ancestor and the seventeenth-century real founding of America: Will Clayton: Founder, Quaker, and Demon Breaker. His website is Live as Free People, which is updated almost daily.