I don't disagree with anything you're saying in the abstract, but I'm trying to point out that you were initially responding to someone who had in turn responded to a very specific viewpoint, and the viewpoint you're arguing for seems to be almost the exact opposite of that top-level comment. Someone claimed "XYZ is why I like lisp", and someone else responded "XYZ seems like it might cause issues in practice", and you jumped in to argue back against that by defending Lisp without engaging with the fact that what they were really responding to was XYZ.