First off, I'll argue with you over calling those asses "liberals". The proper term is "progressive", though they're bleeding into the neoliberals, who are basically welfare-accepting Lolbertarians at this point, as their movement starts disintegrating under the strain of contradictory ideology and purity spiraling. The TERF is a lonely being, indeed, reviled by the intersectional monolith with the sadly-real power to declare one non-progressive and despising the right wing in turn. And retaining the view of moderate liberals as universally right-wing, even if they're Tim Pool.
Regarding my morality, I try to hold positions based on information. The problem with me debating progressives quickly becomes their shoddy citations or lack of them. I refuse to take the word of a debate opponent as innately true, because we hold opposed opinions, and the current political climate is devastatingly hyperpartisan. I occasionally engage their statistics, poke at unstated details their citations imply and point out flaws in using those statistics for their argument, while they tend to just flat-out ignore mine. Seriously, I had an article I linked three times that got completely ignored.
Also, I fully admit a large chunk of my politeness under fire of bigotry accusations comes from being infracted on SV for blowing up in a PM on someone who unironically used the white privilege argument while simultaneously saying race realism is horseshit. It's the hypocrisy that set me off, really. I contemplated jumping into their art thread to render them deeply uncomfortable with my mere presence while acting entirely civil, but I couldn't come up with any critique of the art they made. Was ultimately just too bland and basic to get any critique going.