Now you’re confounding two separate degrees of dismissal. For example, I reject Reform judaism outright simply because they do not believe in the Torah or Hashem. I do not need to analyze and refute every argument or precept of theirs, it is enough that I disagree with their main ideals. There is no need to search for glimmers of truth to learn from them. The degree of dismissal you are talking about, i.e. welcoming dissent and giving it fair review, is reserved for dissent coming from an acknowledged (theological) ally who brings a challenge. I hope you agree, because if not we are back to choosing to follow the Church if their debater is more skilled than ours.
In this case, since I do not want to insult you, I will further explain that I was speaking in general terms in the above paragraph. In this thread, it is not because I view you as a theological non-ally but because your challenge was ab attempt to turn a mainstream accepted practice on its heels based on a pilpul that you’re not the first person in the world to have heard of. It is both rather arrogant and myopic. Myopic that you believe you understood the entire issue and all the possible issues following the discovery of that pilpul all the way up to cancelling a wide spread minhag. Arrogant that you believe you are the right person to bring this light to klal yisroel. I’ll say no more at this point unless you still think I am being unclear.