I'm seeking the end of the suffering of planet earth and it's inhabitants.

Not in my opinion.
I would say that once a disagreement reaches that level of emotion, each side is no longer absorbing information to analyze, and is instead defending their identity.

I feel like generally our emotions are triggered as a response to a scenario.

For example:
Your child is avoiding sleep by thinking of reasons to leave their bed. You would like to sleep. After many rounds of this ongoing situation, your emotional response could be frustration. In frustration one could consider the value of the scenario negative or annoying - or ascribe the value as "bad", but upon further investigation we can conclude that the scenario *does* retain value. I believe value does not stop at emotion, but that emotion plays a factor in our ability to assess a situation to deduce it's value.

Simple. Contact them and ask them if you can have it. If they say "yes" keep it. If they say "no" then they need it.

How about "Nothing is the opposite of everything."