This is where I put the whole wisdom crap to use. You're a person on the internet who is pushing the point of 'you're just giving up' more than what you can actually judge what I'm doing. There's little point in putting so much effort into changing the mind of one who makes assumptions before understanding the questions at hand in the first place.
If that's giving up, so be it. I call it conserving my energy for when someone much more capable of grasping the concepts I lay down comes along.
Making assumptions again, are we?
No, I just wanted to get to the point. As I stated, I used to get angry/offended at such things. I would have hoped you could be objective enough to avoid reading into things that have nothing in between them.
Again, please stop trying to argue on the smallest thread possible. You have your own definition for weakness, but grasping at straws in order to feel right or validated, would be my own.
What a predictable response after these two threads:
http://sociopath-community.com/topic/2014-10-22/i-apologize-2
http://sociopath-community.com/topic/2014-10-19/tips-on-marriage-very-long
"I didn't say that. Disagreements can be productive as long as I'm learning smthg. I ditch the disagreement when it's no longer productive."
Is that when it's no longer fun, or when they're just repeating themselves?
"Hell yes. My discussions with wooster create more good discussions with others than I let on. ;)"
Fair enough. 
"I'll discuss it when I'm not running around caring for the one I CHOSE not to abort, even tho it's still my right to abort an unfortunate accident."
Somehow this sentence had me imagining you thinking they could be aborted long after they're born.
Not technically wrong, but...
"Interesting debates often have to take a back seat to washing the dishes. :("
Yeah...
"So you'd rather talk to people who agree..."
I didn't say that. Disagreements can be productive as long as I'm learning smthg. I ditch the disagreement when it's no longer productive.
And yes. My time is limited. I subject much of what I do to a cost-benefit analysis. Life is short and so is my bank account.
"... Wooster"
Hell yes. My discussions with wooster create more good discussions with others than I let on. ;)
"Are their responses not something..."
Sometimes yes, sometimes no. Depends on the situation.
"What makes their views incorrect?"
That depends on the particular person and the particular argument. I usually only use the word "incorrect" wrt hard and fast quantifiable facts or codes of conduct, procedures, etc. that can be compared against overwhelming consensus or historical evidence that the view I subscribe to works better than the upstart (or archaic and long since discarded) view that my debate partner holds. Yeah, I prefer consequentialist reasoning in these situations.
eg: the belief that abortion should be illegal. I'll discuss it when I'm not running around caring for the one I CHOSE not to abort, even tho it's still my right to abort an unfortunate accident. Depending on the time of day and my chore list, that could be an extremely unproductive argument. In the right environment with the right debating partner it could also lead to a fascinating discussion of Judith Jarvis Thomson's essays, etc. etc.
But yes, I have to put my family's physical needs before my navel gazing. Interesting debates often have to take a back seat to washing the dishes. :(