Well, if we're going to go reaching for the fallacy labels -- that's a pretty textbook appeal to extremes. Discrimination against any portion of the population is reprehensible. But the big moral challenge is determining what exactly constitutes discrimination. Where is the line between just punishment under the law, and discrimination?
Society's laws are designed to protect the interests of everyone in that society (without discrimination!) from those around them that would hurt them, whether through malice or negligence. Implicit in those laws is the idea that you seem to be protesting: that in certain situations, Person A knows better than Person B what's good for Person B. Or, as it may be, what liberties to withhold from Person B to protect others from them. That's prison. And as fucked up and inhumane as I think the American prison system is, I don't know whether it's really possible to have a society without _some_ sort of way of withholding certain rights from people for the protection of others.
And yes, that line of thinking absolutely can (and does) slide down the hellchute into totalitarianism. Avoiding either extreme of that spectrum is the challenge of living in a democracy (or what masquerades as one these days).
Obviously my comment was an appeal to extremes (though honestly, the part about discriminating against muslim was literally was a common talking point). But that was exactly to show how smug and dismissive the argument was.
You can literally use that argument for everything.
"Why don't gay people just shut up and stay in the closest for the benefit of societal cohesion? So egoistic."
"People who are afraid of covid are so self centered and would rather shut down entire societies than to self sacrifice a bit!! Why should we accomodate the hypochondriacs"
And as a muslim your comment, ironically enough, reminds me of how some neocons excused discriminating against Muslims. "Wow I mean there are terrorists out there and we should care about "muh freedomz" for Muslims? After 9/11? Well discriminating and targeting all Muslims is just a small sacrifice for the greater good of our society, it's just the rational thing to do."
There's absolutely no merit to that type of argument. obviously anyone fighting for "mah freedum" as you call it will always be ridiculed and not taken seriously by everyone, by definition. The only thing different and unique this time is the honestly troubling trend of mocking and belittling the concept of freedom or rights in general, just to "own the other side". I'm sure that normalizing such a dangerous rhetoric won't turn against you eventually.