And even if we are good enough, and have a big rational discussion on a hot-button and usually divisive topic, and come out mostly agreeing that the Herp position is right an the Derp position is wrong - that will just make the site more attractive to less-rational Herpists, and give Derpists a pretext to dismiss LessWrong because "they're obviously motivated by Herpism".
This argument seems like it might show too much. If someone said this about an issue that isn't political (say the existence of God) we would reject it. What gives politics such a unique status? Certainly religious opinions create about as much tribalism.
Religious opinions are divisive, we took our side, and don't seem to be considered very highly by those who took the other.
I don't mind closing the community to believers, in first approximation their ideas are worthless. But I wouldn't extend that to liberals, libertarians, conservatives, environmentalists, anarchists, etc.
I can't think of any other topic beyond religion and politics where it's commonly expected that everyone has a position - some people can have strong and conflicting opinions on say parenting styles or whether Esperanto is a real langua...
Are there any areas of study that you feel are underrepresented here, and would be interesting and useful to lesswrongers?
I feel some topics are getting old (Omega, drama about moderation policy, a newcomer telling us our lack of admiration for his ideas is proof of groupthink, Friendly AI, Cryonics, Epistemic vs. Instrumental Rationality, lamenting how we're a bunch of self-centered nerds, etc. ...), and with a bit of luck, we might have some lurkers that are knowledgeable about interesting areas, and didn't think they could contribute.
Please stick to one topic per comment, so that highly-upvoted topics stand out more clearly.