The desire to be inclusive and have balanced discussion on bondage related topics is a commendable one. If you are able to include people that you de-facto do not agree with in conversation this can lead to interesting debate. Including a variety of opinions even those that do not agree with your own is seen as even handed and reasonable.
It is a noble and worthwhile aim.
Sometimes people get this exactly right, they include intelligent and reasonable people of all views in debate. It results in some of the more interesting forum discussions.
Sometimes though people let their desire to be seen as even handed and reasonable allow that desire to override good sense and they invite people not on the grounds that they are sensible, reasonable and intelligent contributors of all views, but simply because they disagree.
Sometimes people disagree because they are fundamentally wrong but cannot see this, sometimes because they lack the mental wherewithal to understand the argument, sometimes because they hold some ridiculous dogma and therefore lack the capacity to debate and sometimes they’re just plain old fashioned mentalists.
Inclusiveness does not mean “I must include my everyone because they’re opposed”. Neither does it mean including a representative of every conceivable view, no matter how loony-tunes it may be. What it really means is including those that have a contribution to make from all viewpoints… providing that they are legitimate view points. Deciding what is a ‘legitimate’ view-point can be tricky to an extent but really just involves your ability to see if the position can be argued rationally or not regardless of your agreeing with it or not.
Including people just because ‘they disagree’ is not even handed, rational or likely to promote debate. And doing it doesn’t make you look ‘statesmanlike’ it makes you look like a prat!