Sorry I guess my point is getting lost - I'm pondering the concept of "if it's OK to 'outlaw' some ideas, like 'slavery is ok', or 'white supremacy is bad' - even though those things can be entrenched in and even define a culture - what are the factors that make that type of cultural extermination acceptable and even desirable, versus things like saying other types of ideas should be kept."
That is, it's not the simple of act of "destroying" a culture or political view that is "evil", it's the type of culture being destroyed that makes it "evil."
Then it gets down to - is it possible to have an objective (not sentimental) criteria for evaluating, say, laws like those to which you are referring. I mean I feel like you that they are terrible laws - but is it just my feeling? Or is there something fundamental that this is based on? I mean it's not laws of physics. Does it really all boil down to pragmatism? Or is there something more, stemming from the religious for example?
Basically I'm not taking it for granted that my view is correct.
And as much as I like to ponder these things...at the end of the day does it really matter, or really is it just "hey you know what, this person here is feeling threatened (even if I don't like their political views or lifestyle or favorite sports team or brand of car they drive), I can do something about, so I should do something about it."