I do agree with what you're trying to say, but I don't think you're going about it in the right way, and I have enough time to complain(sorry, your heart's on the right place).

Your comment has two main problems, 1) hat on a hat and 2) unsubstantiated equivocation

The rebuttal within the meme is funny, welcoming and correct by the standards of the drip making the first irritating comment and the progressive audience who agrees(with you) that sharing is caring.

Agreeing with the sentiment is fine, but you go out of your way to re-explain their perfect rebuttal in a less accurate and more pedantic way.

"humanity absolutely thrives when cultures mix" is a positive and accurate comment within context, while the remainder of your comment and its reasoning is beyond shaky and certainly unhelpful.

You're making unsubstantiated assumptions on the "natural conclusion" of well-intentioned, though misguided protectiveness.

You maintain, without proof or sound logical argument, that the natural conclusion of protecting the cultural practices of others is the intentional separation of all ethnicities, and the implied sterilization of "lesser" ethnicities.

I don't mind the sentiment of your argument so much as the inaccurate and harmful logical process that equivocates irritating do-gooders with murderous bigots.