The following case study was “formed” from a composite of numerous experiences and amalgamated for presentation purposes.
Professor, stopping by the booth (Bill), with a smile he says: “What are you guys up to today?”
John: “Hello....oh, we’re just having this booth to dramatize the injustice of human trafficking.”
Bill: “Having?”
John: “Well (smiling), I guess were “doing “ this booth...whatever.
Bill: “Pretty good idea.” Then leaning back and folding his arms across his chest, “I don’t see why you have to bring religion into it, after all it’s religious people that cause all these sorts of problems.”
John: Taking a second to take in what Bill said, he began, “First, let me introduce myself...I’ve seen you before but I don’t think I’ve ever introduced myself.” Extending his hand, “I’m John Turner in in Mechanical Engineering.”
Bill: Hi, I’m Bill Edwards and I teach in the History Department.
Pause
Bill: “I guess the feeling is that religion is the problem that causes a lot of the things you’re seeking a solution to.”
John: Non-defensively leaning back, “Tell me about that so I understand exactly what you mean.”
Bill: “You know, with all the people like Ted Haggard and those kinds of religious nuts, don’t you feel a little embarrassed about bringing that sort of religion into the university community?”
John: Coughing...”I see, and this upsets you. Do you think I’m a member of his church or something?”
Bill: “I just don’t see how any rational person can oppose gay marriage. I mean I feel the university should be a religious free zone.”
John: “I didn’t know you felt that way...but I’m sure you have thought a lot about that and you have a right to your opinion...but this isn’t about gay marriage, this booth is about human trafficking.”
Bill: “Yeah, I know...
John: “It’s likely we agree about the importance of this particular issue and quite likely we share similar values about this tragedy.”
Bill: “Well I don’t like walking across campus and have people trying to convert me to their religion...this just isn’t a place for that.”
John: “Okay, I hear you...but I’m concerned about this issue because I see that human dignity and the intrinsic value of life and liberty is at stake. Why don’t we focus on that?”
Bill: “Well, I’m not anti-religious. It’s okay if you’re not trying to convert me.”
John: “Have you had an experience where someone tried to convert you and you didn’t want to engage in the conversation?”
Bill: “Conversation? The last time religious folks were on this campus it was a street preacher over by Sather Gate. I got him kicked off camps...There was no conversation, just a lot histrionics and public theatre.”
John: “Well, you need not worry about that here.” (smiling) “You’re free to leave right now.”
Bill: “I just don’t feel comfortable with religious people forcing their views on citizens who have a right to be free from religion.”
John: “Since I want to respect your right not to engage in conversations you don’t want to enter into, feel free to leave now.” (Shaking his head and smiling.)
Bill: “I’ve got to go now to class, but I’d like to come back and talk with you some more about this. Will you be around after the next hour of class?”
John: “Sure, feel free to stop by if you have questions. I may not have an answer for you, but I like the idea of free exchange of ideas...that’s what I take the university community is about.”
Bill: “Okay, I’ve got to run now.”
Possibly there is a lot going on here beneath the surface. First, on the whole it seems John has done the best he could with diffusing some of Bill’s negative reaction to the booth. You might want to review the scenario again and see what specific things John had to say that might have diffused somethings. Second, what do you think was Bill’s real “problem” with the booth? Do you think there were any non-rational issues that Bill had and what do you think they may have been?
Notice Bill’s reaction to John’s twice willingness to the end the conversation...what did Bill say?
You never know how people will react because the message we bring can be greatly misunderstood. John’s objective was first to diffuse some of reaction to the point where the possibility of entering into a conversation might occur and establish some common ground. Can you identify where John tried to identify some common ground? We don’t know what happened afterward in this hypothetical case, but this case can help you see conversations are not only about the exchange of rational ideas...more typically there are many non-rational things going on that need to be understood and handled before the real rational exchange can begin.