Not quite heretic, but more than just in error

I used to have this terrible habit of labeling someone/something, especially when it comes to politics and religion. I have officially decided that political discussions are by and large useless. We all have our opinions, which are more like hard-fast convictions that rarely consider adjustment. All the talk of being bi-partisan is ridiculous and in the end, most everyone refuses to budge and everyone agrees to disagree. As it relates to religion, to have a proper discussion all involved should have a few moments to est. their presuppositions and semantics that will guide their arguments. This would save much hassle and frustration and allow all parties to get to the heart of the discussions.
Of course, most "discussions" get to the agree-to-disagree conclusions, but a few conclusions leave a few persons rather perplexed or befuddled with a certain individual or group.
What do you do when you are faced with such an awkward situation. You really want to call them some generic name or label, but to do so often fails to create closure. Granted some people prefer the terms "extremist", "liberal", "conservative", or "heretic". I just can't go there right away. I need some wiggle room in regards to my judgments. So, after giving this some considerable thought, mainly b/c i have been labelled as such or do the labeling, I have come up with a term that is quite satisfactory, imho. and the word is Eresy or eritic.
For me, this term doesn't go as far as to say someone is a heritic, liberal, extremist, or conservative, yet it makes the observation that the person is a little bit more than off, they are in error. I am not ready to kick them off the island or disregard them all together, but i am really close. It says the jury is still out, I am willing to reserve judgment, or let's keep 'em around b/c it livens the discussion.
It also provides an opportunity for the person(s) to reconsider their positions and give a little more thought. Perhaps they are immature, young, or limited in their worldview. It could be anything, but most of all it keeps the lines of communication open, at the same time identifying dangerous territory in the dynamics of the discussion.
Try it on for size and let me know what you think.