In a thread already close to providing more heat than light, I find it unhelpful to speculate on the motives of other participants.

What we can say for certain is that Katrin argues a position which is inconsistent with the maintenance of the secular state. Whether this is due to accident, sinister designs on the secular state and rule of law (yes, the two go inextricably together), or merely irrelevant collateral damage in pursuit of a different objective considered more important is neither something which can be divined from the position argued nor particularly pertinent to the discussion.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.