If a group disrespects another group, they disrespect it and some shame may befall them.

If they begin to rally for the diminishment of another group - that has caused no harm (other than imagined) - then that group has left the social contract and its protections.

You're conflating conveniently and setting up a garbled false choice where you're arguing in defense of tolerating intolerance because to do otherwise is bad and "both sides."

Once one side proclaims that the other side deserves a punch in the face, the receivers may try to invoke your drivel, but they began by deciding a population should be removed or diminished.

It's not the same.