>"These people are wrong, so they should be silenced" ... would you say that's a fair summation of your position?
These people are intentionally spreading lies to the detriment of society as a whole. Allowing the lies to spread increases their location in search results and starts giving people who are technically illiterate a misguided belief that because it's on a popular site or shows up high in a search ranking that somehow makes the lies more likely to be truth. I've seen it first hand via a friends younger sister who has gone off the deep end and points to "reddit wouldn't allow something like this if it weren't true" when providing such facts as: vaccines have mercury in them so that the government can control your mind through electromagnetism.
>Have you never been wrong? How did you correct your error? Was some form of communication involved? Wouldn't you like others to have that chance too, of correcting an error?
The people in question have had over a year to have their incorrect beliefs corrected and are still regurgitating provably false statements. It's well past the point of "they just didn't have access to the proper information".
>Has the "settled science" not been found to have nuances and complications that might be worthy of further discussion?
The people in question aren't talking nuance. The people in question are claiming viruses don't exist, that science has fabricated it all. What discussion are you planning on having with someone who denies basic reality? There's no nuance to "viruses exist".
>I personally have been saved from likely severe injury by seatbelts. I require passengers in my car to wear them, (absent real reason not to). I still don't think the government has any right to mandate their use nor fine people for failing to wear them. I cannot imagine what positive use would be served by attempting to silence debate on the issue. Negative results of such dogmatic approaches are well documented and often repeated.
"The government" isn't some faceless beast, it is made up of representatives that you and I elect. The majority of people felt that a seat belt law was appropriate, so we have one. If you don't like it, try to convince your fellow citizens to vote for people who are willing to get rid of it. Or if you have the financial means to do so, move to another country in which the majority of the population aligns closer with your belief system if this one doesn't.
As for not being able to imagine what positive results could come from silencing debate: there's no debate occurring. There's a subset of folks who refuse to believe subject matter experts and cast aside any scientific study as fake. You're trying to bring logic and reason to a table at which they aren't just unwanted, they are actively ignored.