Relationships and Rightness

I read this morning and thought it aptly described some of my own thinking and feeling:

The question is how to relate to these individuals when a controversial topic—abortion, say, or Afghanistan—is broached. We have a stock of options for response: retreat, limited resistance (arguing only until someone gets upset), a strategic diversion (speaking of Afghan affairs, did I tell you I’ve learned to crochet?), or full-scale engagement.

Hmm … Interestingly, these are all military metaphors. There’s something about political dialogue more than any other topic that flips us into combat mode. There’s ground we feel compelled to protect, or to gain. For the duration of the argument, the other person stops being my sister or my uncle or my friend: They are my opponent, and I can either convince them of my rightness, or lose.

But lose what? I’ve been mulling that over. Why do I feel so threatened when people I care about take a different political path—and are vocal about it? It’s not the same as reading a columnist I disagree with, or exchanging political punch lines with Facebook acquaintances, or getting into a discussion over healthcare with a colleague at work. Such cases may generate hot air, but they don’t leave me feeling as heated up and vulnerable inside. There’s no personal relationship. When we care about someone, we let them have a stake in our well-being. And part of our well-being, we believe, is staked on being right. The relationships and the rightness get all tangled up.

Read the full article.