[BrandoElFollito]

I do not think that each get is ignoring the important parts of the other. I think they think that these important things are simply wrong.

A foetus is "alive" since the conception. "Wrong" says the other side, it is alive when (something).

Contraception and sex ed are key. "Wrong" says the other side, you can just be abstinent and learn as you go because this is natural.

Ignoring would be simpler, because you could realize that what you are ignoring actually makes sense. We are in a case where each side has well defined views on the important things of the adversary.

[Mezzie]

I was mostly referring to conversation within a certain camp, not between the two sides.

For example, I'm pro-choice and my own side would be ready to flay me alive for agreeing with the legal theory behind the overturning + thinking the economy is likely to be more important politically than abortion. I'm on their side; my opinions matter because they determine which strategies I think would be best to pursue. (In this case, that we need to legislate what we want + that people can't organize to do so unless they have stable housing/food/basic needs so we'll have to help people with that if we want their time and brainpower for social change.)

On the pro-life side, there's a lot of bickering about whether or not the women should be punished (versus the abortion providers) and there is a decent contingent that actually wants their fellows to put their money where their mouths are and financially support pregnant women and their kids.

Talking with enemies is always fraught. This is a dumpster fire because we can't talk to our ALLIES except in thought-terminating cliches.

[feet]

Why should people be forced into abstinence? Why are republicans trying to make contraceptives illegal?

[BrandoElFollito]

I have no idea (I am French and we thankfully do not have this problem).

My point is that the adversaries do not ignore the important points of the other side. These are usually the important point for them as well, they are just exactly at the other side of the spectrum.

This is why there is no way for them to come to consensus as the differences of opinion are about these points.

It is not like someone, when hearing the arguments of the other side, would say "oh, I did not think about this because i thought it was important"