Im not even a slave or a person tortured for the color of their skin or a person being drove off the land they call home because of they are different or not aloud to be married because the god they know nothing about but think they know everything about contradicting each other made me gay, or anything like that and they ruin my life. Im on disability because i have thought about morality and religion so much that i have reached the logical conclusions and see how unfair and cruel people are and the casualties they are comfortable with etc. i hate them and i wish they would all die. If you think everything that was socially acceptable though contradictory is appropriate you deserve to die for your moral laziness assuming you have free will if we decide to show mercy actually because you deserve pain and misery. To look no further than your local town churches or your parents for morality and beliefs which you shouldnt have anyways you deserve to suffer for your moral laziness but you prosper because you are the majority. Fyg and you too.
I answered no because I believe what it is asking is whether people who impose their point of view on others is right. I don't think that rationality has anything to do with it. Any person who is rational will be open to discourse and realize that they do not know everything. So the question should be are irrational people who believe they are right in what they believe ruining the lives of those who are rational and willing/open to the truth
The statement "The people who 'know' [they're] right have always ruined the lives of the more rational who admit when they [don't] know something" is itself a statement which sure sounds as if the person saying it 'knows' he's right. If you say "People who think they are right always make trouble," I could just come back and say "You think you're right about that?" The entire concept is self-contradictory.
I think what is more plausible is saying that people who think they're right about something they are really wrong about cause trouble. Yet this is obvious, and doesn't need a debate to verify its truth value.