Does anyone expect to change the views of anyone through argument? What can happen is that there is a greater understanding of where the differences are, and in some cases a recognition of areas of agreement. At the same time we can get a better appreciation of what we believe ourself, and perhaps modify that. And we can hope that other people who are undecided may find our views convincing.

But you have just described exactly how views can be changed by argument!

None of that is helped by throwing flak around, or slapping people around. And what relevance is that they might deserve it, when "it" does not in any way damage them?

Who said anything about aiming to damage them? I don't care what pete or anyone else believes in. The aim is not to "damage them" but to discredit their unpleasant, insulting and unsupportable views, as publicly expressed, especially if there is an evangelical element involved. There is no point in indulging idiots. An idiot is an idiot.