I listen to and play jazz, rock, pop, gospel, soul, traditional hymns and choral music. There is some junk (musically and lyrically) in every one of those categories (and yes, there are some frankly terrible and lyrically/theologically suspect hymns). Surely the point is not the nature of a genre, but the specific song that you're talking about?
Someone like Phil Keaggy, who is highly respected amongst secular session musicians for his playing ability, has played everything to rock, blues, folk instrumentals, and putting traditional hymns to new music and, in some cases, retaining the old music.
There is actually a stance where you can be discerning about what music you listen to, but actually hold on to the good in all sorts of places while rejecting what isn't.
Also just want to note that coming in and saying that you aren't going to engage with people who disagree with you because you describe them as antagonistic, but then proceed to say things such as "there was a time when I would have agreed with all of the contrary opinions. The Word of God changed me. If you want to love worldly music which glorifies sin, go ahead. God can handle you." is itself antagonistic and needlessly divisive.
You're basically saying people who listen to 'worldly' music (which according to you at least includes rock, country, rap, and CCM) are not receptive to God's word, and either intentionally or tacit glorify sin. This is offensive, untrue, and, dare I say it, antagonistic. To say such things but brook no feedback from people who disagree with you is basically trying to have your cake and eat it too. Frankly, that's putting it generously.