I don't think anyone on this thread is belittling automation, nor do I think this thread is an "I can hand-fly better than the autopilot" discussion either. As mentioned earlier, a decision was made based on stated criteria and the bulk of the conversations thus far have centered around the merits of that decision.

The camps seem to be split on whether or not one should accept an aircraft with an inoperative autopilot. As I mentioned earlier, that would depend not only on the individual, but also on the circumstance(s) as well.

If the aircraft is approved to be dispatched with an inoperative autopilot, then it can be operated legally. Is it dangerous to do so? All things being equal, this really should be a non-event for most people.

Now, if the weather is down, the crew has had a long day, and the flight will be operated into very congested airspace, then the PIC must make - and be prepared to defend - his or her decision if the PIC elects not to accept the aircraft. That decision may be based on factors such as fatigue, experience, and proficiency.

Legally, if the aircraft can be dispatched without the autopilot and the weather is such that it does not negatively affect operating within the bounds of that deferral, then the PIC is going to have a tough time defending his decision based solely on the autopilot being deferred. In other words, why is it a safety issue if one must hand fly? That answer depends on the individual and one answer will not suffice for each and every individual.

Some may refuse to accept the aircraft and some may not refuse to accept it. In either case, both may be correct.