So, my point is that while dissecting how you could have responded may be a worth while exercise, it also may be completely avoidable if you speak more precisely from the outset, or at the very least qualify yourself when challenged.

Right. I meant that, given what has happened, two possible responses emerge: analyzing the situation, and adding to my original comment. Both are instructive. Of course dissection of possible responses isn't necessary when one responds appropriately the first time around. But I didn't.

In any case, I have no intention of defending my original comment. Of course my response to Quatrarius's criticism of it was in self-defense, but that was before this discussion. I intended the comment as an expression of emotion, and spoke with little regard for the effects it would have on the community (e.g. "encouraging this place to become part of the vast liberal echo chamber that is many corners of the Internet"), and for that I apologize.

Truth >>> Politeness.

Had a great discussion with my Physics teacher about this today. He pointed out how hollow the phrase "I respect your opinion" is. What the fuck does it even mean? The only action it seems to foreshadow is cessation of argument, which has little to do with respect and much more to do with the choice to gloss over differences of opinion.

And even if respecting an opinion is a meaningful act, why would I want you to do it? My opinion is a personal belief. It means nothing outside of my subjective experience, so your assessment of it is necessarily meaningless. I would much rather you respect the facts. (This is especially important when debating, e.g., anti-vaxxers, creationists and the like.) Anyway, sorry for the tangent.