I don't see why not, my views have changed on some things over the years, we live and learn :-)

There are some subjects that you just can't argue...religion and politics are the top two. People often don't understand enough about either one, anyway, so why bother arguing about it?

I think it is. If people did not change their minds, we would not now have the religious blocs or political parties that we have. A living person ought to be open to the possibility of change of mind, change or view of at least of learning and adapting if necessary.

Yes, of course... "Never doubt that a small group of commited people can change the world, indeed it is the only thing that ever has."

Not right away. I think an arguement may present some bit of information that might lead to a larger bit, and soon an entire idea may make it into the conciousness of another person. It is slow and often creates a lot of distructive emotion. But argueing is not the way to do it. Discussion is. If you can discuss ideas without anger and bull-headed self-righteous indignation, ideas get exchanged easier. Sometimes both parties will find some value in the beliefs of the other. I think that this should be our goal...simply accepting what he believes and finding some understanding of his beliefs. Everyone has reasons for the things that they believe. We don't have to agree.

If the minds are not closed to begin with, yes, it's possible....unless you're using brainwashing techniques... then it doesn't matter so much.

Not reasonable to "expect" to change minds. Very reasonable to expect the debate to remain civil.

It's hard to have good conversations on these topics, but it's not impossible. Furthermore, these topics can produce some of the BEST dialog -- because they're the things many people care passionately about. People tend to get very attached to their views about politics and religion, because these issues are fundamental to their sense of identity. So, if you challenge someone's view, and they've defined their identity in terms of that view, it's very likely to be perceived as a PERSONAL attack ("I am my view"). My position is that it's a fundamental mistake to define your identity in terms of a view -- regardless of what that view is about. That's clinging to false identity... but it's very tempting, and few can resist the allure of a solid sense of "self" united in lock-step with millions of others sharing the same beliefs. Because of this close interlock between religious / political views and personal identity, enormous breakthroughs can occur when one of these difficult discussions DOES become more than just an us-vs-them battle. If someone is able to relax the grip on their belief system long enough to see things in a new light, they also see themselves in a new light at the same time, and that's what allows for true transformation. So I don't give up on arguing religion and politics: when the walls come down, the whole world opens up.