One of the things many families avoid discussing at the dinner table are controversial topics, particularly politics. Politics can wedge even the closest knit relationships apart and cause disputes with anyone. Within those heated debates, it is almost impossible to find any type of compromise, in some cases those in the argument either avoid or even cut ties with one another. There is this phenomenon that is called common ground, where two individuals can find a shared interest that can help bring them together and see one another as people rather than their opinions. However, people tend to confuse common ground with middle ground, but they are not the same thing. Middle ground is more of meeting each other halfway, but in many cases this …show more content…
But that was not the case with the late Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Antonin Scalia, and this is where common ground comes into play. Ginsburg was more on the liberal side, while Scalia was well known for his conservative views. During their time on the Supreme Court, they often had opposing views during rulings, but regardless of their opinions, a friendship was formed (Elliot). In the article “What We Can All Learn from Ruth Bader Ginsburg” the author recalls the justices friendship as, “This “odd couple” friendship between Scalia and Ginsburg has generated a great deal of commentary over the years, perhaps because, in these polarized times, we long to believe in the possibility of real friendship based on mutual respect and liking, regardless of group identity or political affiliation” (Elliot). Proving that even with different ideals, people can still get along if they can find common ground. Ginsburg and Scalia’s common ground is mutual respect and their passion for the opera. Since common ground is a mutual interest people share rather than a compromise between the two sides, it is easier to manage and maintain a friendship