That's fair. Just don't ding the people who are saying those things better than you might. It's hard enough to fight the good fight when the people on your own side give you crap for supposedly "joining that group" or "knowingly being around those toxic people" as if fighting the fight is the same as joining the other side.
Dude... You're not fighting the good fight, here. You're sitting in the middle of the battlefield between "Let minorities live in peace" and "Minorities should be under constant attack" and choosing the middle ground of "Minorities should constantly have to argue their right to exist".
All while Tone Policing, Sea Lioning, Equivocating, and playing the Devil's Advocate.
The marketplace of ideas isn't mythical. It's what actually changes minds. NOBODY is advocating that terribly bigotry be treated as "equal to all other positions." I don't put the same effort into refuting "all other positions" as I do to refuting "terrible bigotry." It's the backing out from refuting them, and acting like they should simply be dismissed and anyone who comes anywhere close to them should be dismissed, that's treating them special. Refuting "terrible bigotry" requires more hard work and effort, not less. Hand waiving it as "well that's toxic so I will let someone else deal with that, and might make their lives harder for even trying to deal with that" is more akin to treating it as "equal to all other positions."
The Marketplace of Ideas is -abjectly- mythical.
If it wasn't, Bigotry would -always- lose every argument. Where everyone goes "But isn't that just going to cause lots of harm? We should not do that thing." and instead we've got SO MUCH BIGOTRY in the world. And it's on the rise.
The Marketplace of Ideas holds hope that the "Best Ideas" will rise to the top and "Bad Ideas" will be shown for what they are and cast aside. It was a sociological theory invented in the 1700s. It has been proven false time and time again by the endless return of Bigotry. Multiple Genocides, Endless Violence, and Fresh New Laws based entirely in bigotry are rising to the top of the Marketplace anew.
Unless you wish to argue that Bigotry is an idea somehow -deserving- of returning to the top of the Marketplace of Ideas..? Somehow I doubt that is your intent.
The Marketplace of Ideas was a flawed concept from the start.
No, they don't "deserve" respect, the argument deserves respect because of the people watching it. Because the only way to make things better is to engage, and not with anger and dismissiveness and righteousness (though I feel those things plenty) but with reasoned discourse.
No. Their argument does not deserve Respect. It should be shunned. Shut down. Cast out. Made Verboten. Recognized as -evil- and thrown away.
You -cannot- argue with a bigot with reasoned discourse. That just gives them a platform to spew their hatred and use emotional arguments, fallacious rhetoric, and high heaped piles of BS to distract and mislead and waste time while the audience grows more and more accustomed to their outrageous positions and slides that Overton Window just a -little- further toward their ideals.
Giving their position Respect and Debating it Reasonably offers it legitimacy.
The idea that we shouldn't even talk to bigots is toxic. That's how bigots win. That's how you cede the ability to communicate to those who are open to being persuaded, to the worst messages.
No. Bologna. Bigots don't win by being shut down in public discourse. Bigots win by spreading their bigotry and harming people. By manipulating people's perceptions to support their disgusting causes.
Shutting them down shuts them down. Nothing more.
I have not "defended" the people he "supports" and I challenge you to find one single quote from me backing up that accusation. YOU are conflating my engaging with them, and my saying that association with a person does not taint you with the views of that person, with somehow supporting those views. And I am saying that is toxic. Your refusal to make a distinction between a person with bad views, and a person communicating with them, is as you put it "misguided at best." Though I prefer the term lazy.
No. I'm not going to Quote-Mine you to try and piece together what you consider appropriate evidence for your support.
Read this post. From top to bottom. Therein lies your support of bigotry. Of bigots. Your defense of them and declaration that anyone who shuts them down is "Authoritarian" is your proof. Your constant waffling and your attempt to discredit Sacrosanct, as well. Your eagerness to claim the ideas of "Poisoned Wells" and internet mobs across various threads.
Your "Challenge" is just another attempt at Faux-Civility. I respond, now, with it's worth:
As to your other reply, I'm not even gonna bother. Your understanding of politics and history seems to be... lacking. And I've not the time, the interest, or the room to educate you on this forum.