Like any interaction between human beings with high stakes and the capacity for mutual influence and persuasion, argument is a morally loaded encounter. When done ethically, argument can show respect, improve mutual understanding, and enhance democratic legitimacy. When done wrongfully, it can mislead, disrespect, coerce, and manipulate. These moral promises and perils apply in a pointed way to the ethics of arguments about climate change. While flawed argument is not morally wrongful in itself, political discourse on climate change too often involves the intentional use of misleading and manipulative rhetorical strategies, such as the refusal to engage with the core arguments of one’s opponent. This use of morally fraught rhetorical strategies has damaging consequences, both in terms of results of (in)action on climate mitigation efforts and in elevating frustration and polarization across parties. This chapter describes the key ethical problems that can occur in speaking about climate change policies, and guidelines for recognizing and resolving them.