Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

A Conversation You’ve Been Putting Off?

What a divided congregation did together is something anyone can try.

Opinion

A young man holding a smartphone to his ear.

A California church models civil political dialogue through Living Room Conversations, showing how curiosity and listening can bridge divides and strengthen relationships.

Getty Images, Cultura Creative

The Episcopal church in Placerville, California, is not an obvious candidate for political harmony. Its congregation is roughly half conservative and half progressive — a split that, over the past decade, has torn apart faith communities across the country. But this one held together through the pandemic. Through two bruising election cycles and everything else, the congregation’s priest, Debra Sabino, managed to keep their core values front and center. And recently, its members decided they wanted to do more.

Start with what everyone already agrees on

Ken Futernick, co-lead of Bridging Divides El Dorado, was asked to facilitate an event after a recent Sunday service. He began with a simple exercise. He asked people to think about the most important things in their lives — and then to tell the person next to them where their relationships with friends and family ranked on that list.


Almost universally, relationships came out on top. Then Ken drew the obvious conclusion out loud: “If that’s true for all of us, then it would seem to follow that we would want to avoid doing anything that would harm those relationships – like painfully unpleasant conversations about politics that sometimes lead to estrangement.”

He acknowledged the most common solution: just avoid the hard topics entirely. “That’s a rational choice,” he said. “I’ve done it myself.” But he was there to offer something else: a way to have the conversation that actually strengthens the relationship, by approaching it through curiosity rather than argument.

Come to these conversations to understand, not to persuade. That’s the idea behind Living Room Conversations, a format that brings small groups of people together — four to six, typically — across lines of difference, and gives them a structure for actually hearing each other. It has been used in thousands of settings. Ken’s workshop went on to explore how the same approach could extend beyond a formal Living Room Conversation into the everyday conversations people have been putting off.

The phone call, the walk, and what happened next

The Living Room Conversation on immigration went well — people practiced listening, asking real questions, and sitting with views they didn’t share. Then Ken pointed toward the next step: you don’t need a group or a facilitator to do this. You just need one person you’ve been meaning to call. He asked if anyone wanted to role-play what that call might look like.

A woman named Dana Epstein volunteered, held a fake phone, and called “Bob” across the room. “Hi Bob, I’ve been thinking a lot about all that’s going on with immigration right now, and I’m curious what you think. I have a feeling we might not agree, but I’m not sure. Would you be willing to go on a walk with me to talk about it?”

“Bob” — also role-playing — hesitated. “I don’t want it to upset our relationship, but I am willing to give it a shot.”

“I don’t think it will,” Dana said. “I’m not trying to change your mind. I just want to understand what you think.”

They took their imaginary walk. He raised his concerns about immigration enforcement. Reflecting back on what she heard, she said, “So what I’m hearing you say is…” He confirmed she’d gotten it right. Then she shared her own perspective, without disputing his.

“It gave me a chance to practice inviting someone into a difficult conversation in a way that feels safe,” Dana said. “You only get better by trying, reflecting, and trying again.”

For Reverend Sabino, the moment revealed something deeper.

“Being with one another in love isn’t passive,” she said. “It’s a skill — and it can be learned. Watching people practice that conversation, and then applaud it, was one of the most tender moments I’ve seen in this ministry.”

Living Room Conversations, she added, offered more than a technique. “It gave people permission — to stay curious, to stay connected, and to trust that their relationships are strong enough to hold honest conversation.”

The homework assignment that matters most

Ken sent the congregation home with an assignment: before they meet again in a month, each person was encouraged to call a friend or relative — someone they suspected might see the immigration issues differently — and try to have that conversation. Not an argument. Not a debate. Just a walk, or a coffee, or a phone call built on curiosity.

Next month, they’ll sit in a circle and share how it went. Ken will also ask for volunteers to participate in another role play – this time, a gathering around the dinner table, where someone will say something like, “I know we usually stay away from politics, but I’d like to see if we can talk about an issue I’m guessing we’re all thinking about – not to argue, but to learn what one another thinks. If we are willing to give it a try, I will share a couple of things that I think will make the conversation something we all enjoy.”

This is the part that feels underrated in the current conversation about political division. Many of the proposals for restoring trust — in elections, in institutions, in each other — are large-scale: reform the algorithm, fix the primary system, change the incentives. Those efforts matter. But they take years, and they depend on people in power doing things differently.

What Ken is practicing, and what Living Room Conversations was built to enable, starts with a desire to connect. It asks one thing: that you approach someone you care about with genuine curiosity about how they see the world — not to fix them, not to be fixed, but to stay in relationship across the divide.

That matters for democracy in a specific way. A lot of distrust in our elections runs on the assumption that the other side isn’t just wrong but dangerous — that they would cheat, rig, or steal if they could. That assumption gets harder to hold once you’ve spent an hour on a walk, actually listening to someone from the other side. You may still disagree. You may even disagree more clearly. But you are less likely to believe they are your enemy.

The congregation in Placerville already knew that, in a way. They’d kept their pews full and their community intact through years that broke a lot of others. Ken’s workshop didn’t teach them a new value. It gave them a technique — a way to act on the thing they already believed, that relationships matter more than winning.

There’s probably someone you’ve been putting off calling.


Joan Blades is the co-founder of Living Room Conversations and MomsRising, and an organizer of the Trust in Elections initiative for the 2026 cycle.

Ken Futernick is co-founder of Bridging Divides – El Dorado and a professor emeritus at California State University, Sacramento. He is also a county school board trustee and the host of the podcast, Courageous Conversations about our Schools

Read More

The Reward — Angela and James: An American Dynasty

Ring–Fitzgerald Homestead, Will County (1987). A house still true to its original form, carrying forward the Rings’ steadiness, aspiration, and good citizenship across five generations.

Photo courtesy by Patrick Fitzgerald.

The Reward — Angela and James: An American Dynasty

They got an early start; the morning light came on fast. The Ring siblings were headed to the Joliet depot with young Angela in tow — the same depot where Lincoln’s funeral train had passed in silence thirty years earlier. Now they were bound for the White City, forty miles northeast. The Columbian Exposition was a turning point for both Angela and America. Buffalo Bill’s Wild West Show, pitched just outside the fairgrounds, rivaled the Exhibition itself.

One photograph captured it all. Taken in a fairground photo booth, the Ring siblings stood in their summer clothes, huddled around eleven-year-old Angela. Their faces were bright and open — a single moment preserved in time. Determined to outshine the 1889 Paris Exhibition and its Eiffel Tower, Chicago answered with George Ferris’s great wheel. At night, the city glowed, outlined in electric white light.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Knicks and the Practice of Us

Jalen Brunson #11 of the New York Knicks celebrates with the Larry O'Brien Championship Trophy during the New York Knicks Championship ticker tape parade and victory rally celebrating winning the 2026 NBA Finals on June 18, 2026 in New York City.

(Photo by Angelina Katsanis/Getty Images)

The Knicks and the Practice of Us

I didn’t grow up anywhere near Madison Square Garden. My childhood unfolded in the Midwest, far from New York’s tangled boroughs and yellow cabs. My father brought the city with him, tucked in the vowels of his accent and the teams he rooted for. He was a Jersey boy at first. Then, a reluctant Midwesterner. Geography, though, never truly loosened its grip. In our house, sports allegiance wasn’t a choice. It was inherited—an expectation passed like a family recipe. Or a story retold until it blurs into fact.

For my father, and then for me, the Knicks were never just a team. They were a test of endurance. Before I could distinguish a pick-and-roll from a triangle offense, I understood Knicks loyalty: you waited. You hoped in public, persisted when heartbreak was routine. Knicks fandom was boot camp for disappointment. The main skill was getting up after being knocked down.

Keep ReadingShow less
Reclaiming Patriotism: Between Nationalism and Pessimism

People gather over a giant Declaration of Independence

Photo by Mario Tama/Getty Images.

Reclaiming Patriotism: Between Nationalism and Pessimism

As America approaches the 250th anniversary of its independence, I am more in the mood to protest than to celebrate. Does that make me unpatriotic? The answer depends on how we understand “patriotism.” For a nation that is founded in revolution, let’s affirm a deeper and more profound love of country, a civic patriotism celebrative of our larger ideals including pluralism, dissent, and a commitment to social change.

Two Types of Patriotism

Keep ReadingShow less
A New Path to Depolarization: Media That Brings Us Together
Political polarization
Polarization and the politics of love

A New Path to Depolarization: Media That Brings Us Together

As we face ever-growing partisan polarization in American society, the need for large-scale action becomes increasingly urgent. As James Coan and I have written about in the Fulcrum during my time at More Like US, there are approaches grounded in a significant body of social psychological research that can help address this rapidly growing problem, namely different variations of social contact theory, especially vicarious contact. Until recently, much of the research and thus much of the basis for our articles has been focused on applying social contact theory to other problems facing society: prejudice against members of the LGBTQ community, individuals with autism, and immigrant schoolchildren, among other examples.

It was therefore exciting when last fall I saw the publication of an article in Political Science Research and Methods titled "Content That's as Good as Contact?: Vicarious Intergroup Contact and the Promise of Depolarization at Scale." The study, conducted in 2022 in conjunction with YouGov, finally attempted to measure the effectiveness of indirect contact as a path to depolarization, primarily through the vicarious experience of productive political conversation. Encompassing over 2,000 participants gathered from a nationally representative sample recruited by YouGov’s online panel, the study looked to test affective polarization, measured attitudinally, and interest and investment in depolarization, measured behaviorally. To this end, the study tested multiple media interventions, namely a 50-minute Braver Angels documentary featuring a “Red-Blue” depolarization workshop; a 50-minute placebo nature documentary about wildebeest migration; a 5-minute version of the Braver Angels documentary; a second 5-minute version that emphasized partisan misperception correction; and a pure control group, with no treatment.

Keep ReadingShow less