I agree. Breaking down a debate into arguments which have moral and factual premises will be useful. The logical validity of the argument can be automatically enforced. The system wouldn't allow you to make an invalid argument.
Showing people exactly where they disagree would be a huge advancement. I think there are plenty of people who care about the truth and also care to have a consistent worldview in terms of morality.
For me and you, this is true. Unfortunately, INSERT_MAJOR_NEWS_NETWORK is proof that the vast majority of people don't give a shit about logical validity.
I think that the success of sites like Snopes indicates that a significant percentage of people DO care about facts.
We'll never have a situation where 100% of people are 100% fact driven in their belief systems, but maybe the needle might move in the good direction if more tools were available to help the transition.
Showing people exactly where they disagree would be a huge advancement. I think there are plenty of people who care about the truth and also care to have a consistent worldview in terms of morality.