Tricia and I have an ongoing debate about how best to address folks with whom we passionately disagree. In person and in prose, Tricia is always looking for “teachable moments” (when conflict can lead to enlightenment), whereas I am usually looking for “gotcha moments” (when the other side makes an obviously flawed or disingenuous point).

We usually talk about this within the context of “persuasiveness”. Tricia argues that you can persuade more flies with honey than with vinegar and I grumble that you can persuade the most with a flyswatter. Trouble is, neither of us are right.

At least on some level, especially about the most important (“hot button” or complicated) issues, no one can convince anyone of anything. Ask a Christian about God’s existence, a neo-con about Iraq’s WMD, or a liberal about Bush’s accomplishments, and you will get the exact answer you were expecting… and there is no argument nor evidence you could produce to elicit a different one.

If persuasion, then, is not an obtainable goal of “animated conversation” – what is? I submit it is honor.

The other night Jon Stewart sat down with Mike Huckabee, former governor of Arkansas, former GOP Presidential candidate, former Baptist pastor, and current opponent of gay marriage. These are two articulate and affable men who engaged in an articulate, affable conversation … about other people’s civil rights and basic humanity being denied. Finally, Jon Stewart shook Huckabee’s hand and thanked him for the conversation.

Polite, well-mannered, gentlemanly. But wouldn’t the more honorable ending have been a punch in the face? To be fair, Stewart also said, “Listen, this is just wrong.” He was very clear in his honorable position, but I would argue, too civil in his presentation.

If we can’t do any good in such conversations (Huckabee at one point said, “I don’t think we’re going to come to terms on this.”), doesn’t that mean that the only thing we can do is… well, bad?

Others have written about what I call the Myth of Objectivity. Ariana Huffington calls it “Equal Time for Lies” in her latest book, Marty Kaplan credits it with the downfall of newspapers, and Fox News lovingly refers to it as “Fair and Balanced”. But, those critiques are really about journalism.  My concern centers on discussions where each person’s views are known going in.

Maybe it is no co-incidence that Jon Stewart was also the one who brought down CNN’s “Crossfire” by saying all that yelling was “hurting America”. And, of course, he was right. I’m not advocating screaming at people, no matter what clap-trap they spew (not only does yelling never work, it’s terribly tacky). What I am suggesting is that sometimes politely disagreeing actually hurts your cause, if not your case.

When the other guy says “the earth is flat” or “gay is a choice” or “Obama wasn’t born on American soil,” the smart thing to do is to engage them point by point, gently but firmly persuading them to the truth. But the honorable thing to do is say, “You, sir, are a fool (or bigot or liar) and I will not pretend that your views are rational, revelatory, or respectable (always argue in alliteration when you can).”  And then debunk their argument bit by bit (with facts and sources) until they admit what they really think underneath their polite talking points.

Now, some will say that name calling is never constructive, but I’m not sure that’s always true.  Calling someone “stupid” or “four-eyes” is not the same as calling them a “liar” or a “bigot.”  At the end of their conversation, Huckabee clarified that not everyone who is against gay marriage is a homophobe and Stewart politely agreed.  What self-respecting host would go around calling his guests names?

But, someone who is against gay marriage is a homophobe.  A politician who says that Iraq was behind 9/11 is a liar.  People who think that Obama is or was secretly a Muslim are wrong.  It may not be polite to call them out, it may not even be helpful in the short-term, but it is honorable.

All people are created equal, but all ideas are not.

The answer can’t be to not have the conversation.  I’m not suggesting that everyone just retreat to their corners and never engage outside their own bubbles.  But, when opposing views clash, truth cannot give way to manners, nor truth to perspective, nor honor to civility.  And Jon Stewart was tougher on Huckabee than anyone else not on a cable news show would have been.

Maybe that’s what I’m really upset about. That this week’s most aggressive opponent of bigotry never let the conversation get uncomfortable and, in the end, smiled politely and shook the other guy’s hand.