You used the word 'sectarian'. You also used words like 'privilege' and 'Stalinist.' It's in the archives.

Yes, but I did not use them for saying what you say I said.

ThatBritGuy:

With gay marriage - huh? Are you saying people believe gay marriage will undermine free healthcare or their pension plan?

I am saying that family gets a significance that it had already lost. People will depend more on family than they used to. Ask all those young people in Greece and Spain why they are still living with their parents. My generation will get a very low pension, much lower than what my parents had. Right wing ideologies emphasising family relations do make sense when the social net is cut. Successful ideological strategies always connect somehow with real fears or interests.

ThatBritGuy:

Generally members are more liberal than leaders, which is interesting in itself.

That contradicts your claim that "the majority of religious people" was obsessed against gays, doesn't it?

ThatBritGuy:

I have no idea what European-wide attitudes are. I doubt it's possible to generalise when - for example - Poland is staunchly Catholic, while Finland very much isn't.

Good. Then it would be very helpful if you no longer claimed to know the attitudes of "the majority of religious people".

ThatBritGuy:

I look forward to further responses that tell me I'm disgusting and full of shit, by the way. Have you considered that perhaps name-calling is not the most persuasive of tactics in this context?

I have considered a lot, and perhaps you noticed that for a few days I didn't answer any of your posts at all. There is not much I can do with a person who twists everything I say. I have run out of persuasive tactics in this case: the written language of our posts is the only means of communication we have here. If that is twisted, what can one do? By the way, before you develop the next variant of twisting of posts: I did not call you disgusting or full of shit. I called your posts that.

You entered this discussion (on the previous thread) shrugging off the human rights violations Muslims face in Europe with "try and open a pub in Saudi Arabia", which I find atrocious enough (if it really needs pointing out why: you are entitled to human rights no matter if your government violates them.) And you went on by twisting the meaning of every post of mine. No I have never demanded any privileges for the religious or religious organisations. I demand that we aren't disadvantaged though. You have made clear that religious freedom does not exist for you.

Your behaviour is not that of "everyone" here. I have quarrelled with Jake and Eurogreen, and there was unfairness on both sides. I am sorry about that, but I don't know any way how I could have avoided it except by not raising the topic, and I no longer wanted that. Your behaviour, claiming over and over again that I say what in reality I never said, is different and it is offensive. No, I don't think I am treating you unfairly. I understand that you had some very unwholesome experience and generalise, but it is really nothing I am responsible for.