I'm in the midst of sorting through a controversial issue. It seems that some of the controversy arises from each side forming an opinion of the opposition without any direct interaction. If they just talked, they still might not agree, but would at least have a better understanding of their differences. This could open the path to some sort of compromise and avoid catastrophe.
Entering a discussion looking for compromise, I imagine my uncle telling me, is looking for defeat. If one is willing to sacrifice a belief so readily, is that belief (or that person) even worth defending?