I think I would look at the whole issue of respect and respectfulness in three different contexts, when it comes to EVC and its associated debates:
1. If (as a non-believer), I debate with a YEC and they were to maintain that despite all of the evidence and all of the science, their belief remains solid that the YEC narrative is correct (as an article of faith, and perhaps as a result of a "godddidit" line of reasoning), then I can respectfully disagree with that view. It's their life, their belief and their right to believe. I will try to avoid language like "you're wrong and I'm right", since that implies superiority and inferiority - I will focus on agreement and disagreement instead.
2. If I debate with a YEC, and they were to seek to twist, invalidate or invent the science, or fail to provide evidence for a scientific proposal which they cite in support of the YEC narrative, then language like "you're wrong and I'm right" will come into it. I can still respect their right to their belief, but I have very little respect for attempts to derail scientific enquiry and advances, in order to try to dress the YEC narrative in something verifiable.
3. If I debate with a YEC, and they argue that the YEC narrative is not only scientifically supported, but should also be taught in schools as valid science, then the language is going to be "HELL NO ! That may be your belief, but you are not lumping that claptrap onto anyone else's children and calling it science !"
In all three scenarios, I will always respect the other person's right to their belief. But the respectfulness of the terms of the debate will vary, dependent upon whether the person seeks to damage scientific advancement or children's educations, in order to make them feel happier about their belief.