disagreeing with dignity

I once heard Peter Rollins share a story about an activity he facilitated with a small group. During this event people met together and were encouraged to talk about controversial topics in the world. Everyone was told to be bold and aggressive in their views and not to be wishy-washy or masquerade as moderates. Disagreements and scathing debates ran rampant the entire evening as some people even started to shout over others in an attempt to get their point across. When reflecting on this, Rollins mentioned three ways that people usually handle conflict:

1. I’m right, you’re wrong, and I try to change your mind so you are on my side.
2. I’m right, you’re wrong,  so screw you.
3. We’re both right, so let’s drink a beer. (Along the lines of some kind of “interfaith” dialogue or pluralism)

In all three of these, notice that you are the one with the “right” viewpoint (even if you decide to “set aside your differences!”). In order to move beyond this, Rollins took a different approach to conflict. At the end of this tense (and potentially awkward) activity, he had everyone take a piece of paper and write down a personal belief that they believed no one else held. He had everyone mix up their pieces of paper in a box and people drew random ones without looking at them. Everyone took their jacket and cut a hole in the fabric in order to place the paper inside. Needle and thread was passed around to sew up their torn clothing. Rollins described this activity as a way for people to truly realize their differences and to embrace them (and in a sense to continually carry them after the activity).

It oftentimes troubles me how difficult it is to move past initial disagreements. We hold our beliefs so closely that we potentially find it difficult to imagine being in close community with someone who’s greatly different from us. Of course this is ironic as we are all greatly different, so we just overlook the “little differences” of those close to us and are quick to point out the “big differences” that the other may have. It comes as a surprise to many that Tony Campolo is married to someone who holds a widely different view on sexuality. It’s enticing to build up walls and justify doing so by citing passages about “being equally yoked” (all while dismissing values such as charity and hospitality). It’s easy to chose one of the above three options.

I think it was absolutely astounding how much buzz surfaced on Facebook and Twitter over Chick-Fil-A Appreciation Day several months ago. (Tara and I only eat meat about once a week and neither of us really like fast food, so I think I’ve only taken her there once to get their peppermint milkshake during the Holiday season, ha!). The disagreements were incredibly obvious as people posted opinions concerning a 440-calorie chicken sandwich.

Chick-Fil-A kind of fell off of the news radar for several months. However, a friend of mine shared the following bit of news with me yesterday. Shane Windmeyer is a LGBT activist and the executive director of Campus Pride. He wrote this article reflecting on the friendship he has developed with Dan Cathy (yes, the Dan Cathy of Chick-Fil-A). I’d encourage you to read what he has written. It really is insightful into the conversation about disagreements and how to handle differences. Here are his concluding remarks:

Now it is all about the future, one defined, let’s hope, by continued mutual respect. I will not change my views, and Dan will likely not change his, but we can continue to listen, learn and appreciate “the blessing of growth” that happens when we know each other better. I hope that our nation’s political leaders and campus leaders might do the same.

In the end, it is not about eating (or eating a certain chicken sandwich). It is about sitting down at a table together and sharing our views as human beings, engaged in real, respectful, civil dialogue. Dan would probably call this act the biblical definition of hospitality. I would call it human decency. So long as we are all at the same table and talking, does it matter what we call it or what we eat?