OK. So what is your idea of educational discourse? I’m serious, let me know and I will try to follow your rules in posting here in the SBR.
Circular rhetoric, sales pitches, falling into victim-hood are all useless ploys that deminisin and destroy discourse. Not responding directly to questions, especially when it is taken from ones scripture or other documents of their faith also limits the exchange of ideas. Saying people are bashing when they call you on the fallacies in those works is problematic (see victim-hood).
Saying I don't know instead of lashing out is a good thing.
Telling people they are just quoting “anti” sites is useless. They maybe doing so, but if from there they have brought good questions and quotes from ones own works of faith, there is no fault in that. The challenge should be answered, even if it is for the thousandth time. The reverse of that is true too, if the question is answered, continually asking tying to illicit anger or anything else is pointless as well.
Preemptive or reactive insults, indeed any at all, are useless, and to be blunt usually leads to a pissing contested.