Well, whether it's subjective name-calling depends on whether you substantiate it in some way. If it's a contradiction in terms, then name-calling is not the issue. And if it isn't, it might be possible to defend it.

I think there's some ambiguity in the idea that something people repeat is actually a "widely held viewpoint".

Saying it's bizarre seems to me to be standard shorthand for "if you really think about the implications, which people usually don't".

So-called "ideas" or "viewpoints" are more fit in an evolutionary sense the less people think about them while transmitting them.