What is the ruling on deeming permissible raising one's voice and engaging in forbidden argumentation?

The permissibility of the unlawful act that necessitates disbelief is specific to those prohibitions that are unanimously agreed upon as definitively forbidden, and whose prohibition is known by necessity to be part of the religion, and whose ruling has become manifest among Muslims, such as deeming permissible adultery or pork. This is provided that the person who deems it permissible does not have a specious argument or interpretation. If there is an interpretation, then the one who deems it permissible does not become a disbeliever, as happened with Qudamah ibn Madh'un and Abu Jandal ibn Suhayl regarding the consumption of wine. Deeming impermissible argumentation and disputation permissible is not disbelief, because its prohibition is not known by necessity to be part of the religion. Raising one's voice is not inherently forbidden except for an incidental reason, such as raising it against one's parents or in the mosque. The forbidden disputation is to impugn the words of others to show a flaw in them or in the speaker, with the intention of belittling others or demonstrating one's own cleverness and intelligence, and it is forbidden if it is with this intention.