Furthermore, the premise of this discussion, from the other thread, was that if you determine that all your opponents’ arguments are bigoted ahead of time, you will find it easy to dismiss them without argument. Ultimately, you will find it difficult to understand your opponents’ arguments and will find it difficult to persuade them of the correctness of your own.
I think this is bad in a democracy and it’s especially bad for the causes that I believe in — like same-sex marriage.
This thread is a microcosm for society at large. A small group of people have decided that certain arguments are beyond the pale and not worthy of discussion in polite society. They have become so isolated and insular that they are unable to recognize that their opinions are far outside the mainstream and they become unable to persuade their neighbours of the correctness of their arguments. They attempt to ban "invalid’ arguments or to slander their opponents as bigots instead.
This is disastrous in a democracy (THOWGT) and it makes for a very sterile debating forum. As I said in the other thread, rather than fighting ignorance, it serves to enshrine it.