I live in nervous fear. Each night I lie awake, trying to wrap my brain around what I have to do in the coming week, where I have to go, and what I have to say.

My personal nightmare is looking on Google Calendar and seeing I have booked two speaking engagements at the same time. Ever since my book, "A Home on the Field" was selected as summer reading at UNC, there is not a day when my e-mail does not have an invitation to speak about immigration. Book clubs, Rotary Clubs, radio shows, schools, libraries and other organizations want to discuss the book and what some pundits have called "the third-rail of American politics."

President Barack Obama recently launched his initiative to push through legislation that would deal with immigration and the millions of people in the country without papers. Commentators thought the president would not pile another monumental issue on an already full plate. They thought wrong. The president promised that he would begin the heavy lifting on immigration. I'm not sure if he has much choice given the help he received from Latino voters across the country, including North Carolina, and the fact he will need their ever growing voter rolls in 2012.

People want to talk about this issue. That's great. We can talk about it. We can talk about all the reasons why this migration happened, how it happened, why it happened and what to do with the millions of men, women, and children who are here without papers. Talking about it is not the problem. How we talk about it has always been the problem.

Maybe it's because immigration brings out the most emotional responses in some people. Maybe it's because it's easy to demonize people we don't know and who do not enjoy the same protections as we do. Or maybe it's difficult because this time the issue of immigration is also tied to the issue of race. With immigration, it's the how that matters the most. If you want proof of this, look no further than the Tom Tancredo fracas that happened at UNC last spring.

So, how do we begin to talk about this issue? Let's start with the basic agreements and some concessions. The most basic agreement is to remain civil. This means abandoning language that one side considers offensive. That means, for some, abandoning terms like, "racists" and "illegals." Anti-illegal immigrant groups and members don't like being called racists. Advocates for people without papers don't like people being called illegal. If your bile ducts are working overtime on this one concession, then maybe you should reconsider being a part of any discussion on immigration legislation.

Here's another. Whatever legislation the federal government comes up with, people without papers are going to be allowed to stay. Not all of them. But most. The president has pledged this; the election has cemented it.

Yet another starting point is: we are going to secure our borders and limit future migrations. That's going to happen as well. There may be disagreement on how that is accomplished but it is one of the prevailing goals throughout this entire debate.

These starting points are based on civility, freedom of speech, and on the historical record of this issue. We can't keep going back to zero on immigration just because one faction doesn't like the compromise. We'll get what we had during the Bush years, a whole lot of nothing. And anyone who still believes in the idea of attrition and self deportation should take a hard and honest look at that thinking and realize that even in the toughest economic times in the past 60 years people without papers have not self deported and are not going to. Equally, there is not going to be a blanket amnesty.

We are going to be talking about this issue in the coming year. It's an important issue to North Carolina, which was at the vanguard of migration in the past 20 years. How we talk to each other about it and where we are with this issue are equally important as where we end up.

We can start working on the how right now. If you are going to comment on this column, see if you can follow the tenets laid out above. And try to be civil.

Write to Paul Cuadros at pcuadros@mindspring.com.