When to hold your tongue?

[claymcdermott]

My classmates and I are in our final year of premed. We were having a casual conversation, when he abruptly asked, “What do you all think of abortion?”

I suggested we change the subject. He (I think comedically) asked us what we thought of gay marriage. The rest of the group seemed to want to have the discussion on abortion, but I had the sense any discussion we could have would be unproductive and caustic, and put a strain on our dynamics in the lab or on projects.

I think I did the right thing, but given how often one knows the abortion conversation will almost certainly be counterproductive, how do you know when to say, “Let’s change the subject” and when to say, “This is an important conversation; we should have it.” ?

 

[Fr.Charles_Grondin]

These are prudential judgments that don’t always have black and white answers. I don’t see anything wrong with not wanting to discuss a topic that is going to strain tensions, create division, and produce no real tangible good. After all, St. Thomas More went to great lengths to not enter into discussion about King Henry’s situation.

I, personally, tend to go by and advise others to ask “what is the point here?” In the situation you describe it appears to me that the individual was just trying to stir the pot and create a mess that he or she could enjoy watch develop. There’s no point to entering into those discussions. However, there are situations where people are genuinely interested in hearing what other people have to say and having a real conversation, and in those situations I would encourage to enter into those conversations.