Disagree without being disagreeable

I hope to convince my church to adopt a Vision Statement that explicitly says we welcome all people (including gays). So far the response has been mostly yawns. However, I will soon start talking about specifics -- actually talking about gay people -- and I may have to disagree and I don't want to be disagreeable. Here's ideas on how to do that.

* People may think they are trying to help. Acknowledge the help then gently explain why it isn't helping.

* People may be oblivious to the damage they are causing. Gently point out why their actions aren't as benign as they think. Watch out for when people are acting from a position of privilege because they get defensive. Note the privilege only means benefiting from outside sources.

* Others goals may be opposition to mine. Acknowledge which goals remain in common.

* Only then consider the response as antagonistic. It usually isn't.

Be aware in ways the conversation can be misunderstood.

* What is said may not be what is meant.

* What is heard may not be what is said. This includes physical problems in speaking and hearing along with mismatch between words, tone of voice, and body language. It also includes the recipients mental state and how well attention is being paid.

* The conclusion reached may not be what is heard. The message may be incomplete and the listener fills in the gaps based on personal experience, including past experience with the same speaker.

* There is an emotional response to the conclusion, including whether the listener allows that emotion to be felt.

* All that, plus personal rules, guide possible responses.

Most of the time this process works just fine and happens almost instantly. But discussions get heated usually because a step in this chain breaks. Time to take a step back.

What is the speaker (including myself) trying to accomplish? Pass on information? Prove I'm right? Convince? Simply vent? If venting, let it get out of the way and do it in a manner appropriate.

If to convince, one needs to sell arguments in a way the other person can understand.

I've encountered the person who thinks that if I don't agree with them it means that if they keep at it they might convince me. Sometimes it means I don't agree with them. That point should be acknowledged if each side can accurately summarize the other's arguments. Further discussion is only annoying.

If you are convinced, acknowledge it.

A possible way out of a disagreement is to reframe the issue, to state it from another perspective.

Know your audience. It may be more than the person sitting in front of you.

Answer calmly and with facts. Never respond to an insult with another one. Respect your opponent. They may be a good person trying to do what's right. And if they aren't, responding with utmost politeness (but not condescension) can be a lot of fun.

Don't confuse civility with weakness.

Don't project your experiences on the other person. Let them talk about their own experiences.