I think there’s a huge difference between disagreement/difference of opinion between individuals and supporting or enabling policies or ideologies that lead to exactly the kinds of atrocities you cite as examples.

I don’t agree that we should be free to say whatever we like. There should be limits to speech. Spreading misinformation about the Holocaust is prohibited under German law, for example. Is the person saying, “I’d love to sucker-punch a Nazi” comparable to the person shouting “Heil Hitler!”?

Do I think every pro-lifer is a dead-eyed Christian fascist waving a giant sign with images of slice-and-diced fetuses in front of the SCOTUS? No. I’m sure there are many highly principled individuals who genuinely believe human life is sacred and their actions demonstrate the integrity of people who practice what they preach. But even these people, regardless of intentions are unwittingly supporting an illiberal ideology that will manifest as a system of government, not a free exchange of ideas.

We’ve seen this movie. We know how it ends.

This is no longer a question of difference of opinion; it’s a losing battle to uphold a fragile democracy that even under the best of circumstance is difficult to sustain. Denying the right to abortion, without exception is a perversely myopic view that fails to consider devastating consequences and does not reflect the opinions of the majority. Overturning Roe effectively shuts the conversation down, leaving no room for opinion, except for those expressed by the proponents of a rigid patriarchal system. Who does that benefit?