Not at all. I'm trying to establish that good logic, that is, logic with a reasonable chance of a useful outcome, must be predicated on reasonably sound premises. Of course, good outcomes are possible, by accident, with logic predicated on bad premises, but that's no way to live life really, is it, when a better way forward beckons? It isn't really about who "accepts" what premises. It's about whether those premises are valid and honestly cast.