When I get into philosophical discussions with people, I now ask them to specifically state the negative side effects of their beliefs. I ask this early in the discussion, because if they can’t answer they’re not worth talking to.
For example, some people are happy to make wise-ass comments about people who don’t believe in evolution. Ask such a person what he believes the downsides of the theory of evolution to be. The answer will be enlightening. Most people will look at you with a blank stare. This demonstrates that such a person is as ignorant as anyone he’s criticizing. At that point he can safely be ignored. HBDers are the only ones – at least that I am aware of – who can honestly answer the question about the downsides of evolution. In their telling, the downsides of evolution are: 1) groups have different average levels of skills and abilities; 2) some people will simply be unable to perform at certain levels (e.g. we can’t all be Einsteins, even if we’re all taught by Harvard graduates in elementary school); and 3) modern, liberal society’s selection pressures seem to be creating an ever-stupider population.
Feminism also presents itself as an "everybody wins" phenomenon. Obviously this is bullshit. We can easily see the ultimate logical conclusions of feminism: fatherless children; marriage as just another stage in relationships that end after a few years; a totally screwed up sexual marketplace with a few major winners and hordes of losers; the death of femininity; the death of masculinity; the growth of the welfare state; etc.
It’s particularly enlightening to ask someone to explain the downsides of democracy. Talk about blank stares.
If your beliefs have no consequences, you haven’t though very hard about them.