"If you're not for us you're against us" is a poor counterargument, no matter how eloquently stated. There must be room for more nuanced positions. If insufficient knowledge is not sufficient cause for having no position, the only possible result is complete polarization.
Perfect information is rarely available for any situation, yet one must interpolate the best that one can. It seems to me that we have more information than most.
When more information is available, we then adjust (Bayesian interference).
