why avoid argument in 12-step programs?

I am a long time member of a 12 step program called Emotions Anonymous.

And a "believer" who is dogma-aversive.

I know that in 12-step recovery work, we create safety in our diverse groups through our careful avoidance of argument. We heal, we find out we are not as broken as we think, by listening and allowing people to express their own unique opinions.

There is always a tension in diversity, but that tension also makes things interesting and helps us see the paradox in our own simple recovery path.

My problem is I love to argue. Or is it just that I am trained to notice how I want to distinguish my differences from others, even when agreement would be more conducive to peace?

I think each of us in "program" knows there is a dynamic tension always in our groups, because our stories can never overlap one hundred percent. One day we must see those differences and talk about them as well, while being observant that many people are easily hurt and argument can divide and destroy a delicate sense of safety.

In our program we choose to focus on the agreement, while allowing and then eventually learning to cherish the places where we may be different. No one needs to be just like us. It is in speaking about who I am, through my own unique perspective that I share a thread that might meet someone's unexpected need. We have harmony AND different colors that contrast.

I need your differing point of view, but not your need to be right about it. Righteousness is the enemy of healing. Nor do you need my righteousness, as proud of my own lessons as I may be, I may be mistaken. Yet there is my differing perspective as a spice of life.

And as we advance in program, we notice things that come to us from outside program that we want to share.

Another clear boundary in our groups is that we use only approved program literature at a meeting, however humble it might be. What we share from printed materials, must come from agreed on literature, approved from EA International. Some folks find this rigid at first. We can be autonomous when we share from our hearts, as we try to put our personal experience into program perspectives. But in a meeting, pre-printed materials shared from the media, or books written by popular writers can introduce points of disagreement that we so assiduously avoid.