For most written history, the belief that people have an inherent glory or beauty has been asserted among intellectuals. It was a starting-off point, and then dialogue about our issues came from that, as well as any rhetoric that pointed to our relationship with deities.
However, something changed around the 19th century, and the idea is now that humanity has some sort of innate failing or insignificance, and then the dialogue moves to trying to assert how people are somehow significant or can become significant.
I think the starting point is everything, and as a Christian, there are some CRITICALLY powerful axioms that must be asserted and defended:
1. God's existence is certain.
2. Given God's existence, humanity's existence has value (from God's perspective).
3. Given humanity's value, there's something wrong and worth fixing within humanity.
These presumptions can then frame a healthier dialogue.

I AM SO VERY WRONG HERE!
- GOD LITERALLY DESIGNED THE UNIVERSE FOR A RELATIONSHIP WITH HIM
- THIS MEANS THAT MY AXIOMATIC BELIEFS STARTING FROM "FIRST PRINCIPLES" WITHIN THE SELF ARE UTTERLY MISGUIDED

[Indifferentism - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indifferentism)
- also goes to GIS glossary