It isn't an argument. Commercial gaming is not the only interesting part of gaming on the whole, you have a mercantile point of view.
Hm, well just replace the word 'commercial' with 'quality' or 'finished' then, I know how sensitive you are to these things
JOGL is at least as well designed as LWJGL for games if we consider them only as OpenGL bindings. I refuse that LWJGL users try to make people believe that JOGL should not be used for gaming.
You don't have to: Nobody is trying to make people believe that JOGL shouldn't be used for gaming, that's just your perception.
It is only suggested that LWJGL was created purely with games in mind, and it has also been around a bit longer than JOGL which might explain why LWJGL has been used more for games. Of course that doesn't necessarily exclude JOGL from being a good choice for gaming.
That said, LWJGL has an advantage that it doesn't depend on AWT, which makes it easier to distribute the game without depending on (a certain version of) Java being installed (using native binaries or a small private VM without AWT).
Other than that, I think it's mostly a matter of taste, really. I like how LWJGL (the OpenGL part) is really a straightforward binding to the OpenGL API without trying to make OpenGL look like it's OO because it really just isn't. And the last time I checked, LWJGL was a lot smaller than JOGL.
Other people prefer the JOGL way of doing things, so as always YMMV.