Dawkins is about as emotional as you can get. A prominent sign of irrational thinking is when you refuse to acknowledge that your assertions have been demolished by the logic of your opponent. Just observe Dawkins debate John Lennox.
Wanting to assume the appearance of engaging in reasoned speech is not the same as actually engaging in it.
Looks like your way will lead to removal of protection from all speech.
A scientist can get emotional too; certainly can an artist. The test is whether the argumentation is lacking and the content of the speech is directed at the listener’s negative emotion. Not whether the speaker gets emotional in the process or delivery.