I'm sure this makes perfect sense to you in the comfort of your 21th century PC culture.
However, Calvin lived in age when men believed (correctly) that it was the magistrate's duty to uphold both tablets of the Moral Law of God, that is, the Ten Words.
Your friend Servetus was already convicted of public blasphemy and heresy, etc in other civil jurisdictions. He fled to Geneva hoping to escape execution, which is what his public crimes deserved. The civil authorities in Geneva would not have any of this, and with the aid of Calvin as prosecutor, they put your friend to death.
So, you may examine the case to see this was not merely a matter of “theological disagreement” (e.g., red wine vs. white), but a direct violation of the Ten Words, which used to hold sway in both the civil and ecclesiastical realms until the Church and State in the West became infected with Enlightenment humanism.
So what you are now advocating is MORAL RELATIVISM.
Calvin's seeking the death penalty for Servetus was just as much a sin in 1550 as it would be in 2008. God is not a moral relativist. Calvin and you OTOH was/are.
Calvin was a tyrant even by the standards of 1550. Just because everyone was a tyrant in 1550, does not mean that Calvin wasn't.