I'd agree with you on most of your points, I just think it's a tad idealistic. It would be easy to hold a discussion without "strong armed intimidation" if the subject was as objective as our desired approach to it, say, Hawking radiation or string theory. Theological discussions run so close to people's integral beliefs, though, that a civil discourse will at times be impossible. With all of the various viewpoints expressed here, you're going to step on somebody's toes. You may as well invite Farrakan and a KKK member to a Jerry Springer episode. I think that, of course, peaceful and mutual exchanges of opinions is a lofty goal. And when you have people from opposite ends of the spectrum on an issue of pure opinion, not objectivity or provable issues, fights will break out. I'm as guilty as any.