"I know you will say you are not defending the latter by citing the former; in which case, what exactly is your point, then?"
My point is, and always has been, that all religions by their very nature carry the risk of persecution, and to refuse to recognise that fact is to allow that risk to continue.
To trivialise this case, in the context of the thousands of rapes of children by members of the Catholic, really doesn't give your case much credibility.
Your mentor has done his level best to censor this discussion to hide the fact that Christians are just as likely to persecute as any other religion is, you, true to form, agree with him.
You must give us your sliding scale of when an offence becomes a crime and then becomes an abuse of human rights sometim.
It seems to be a guiding light in your thinking on a number of subjects.
I would have thought that, despite decades of revelations of clerical abuse, Christina clergy, including those in the upper echelons, are still proving themselves sexual predators a point well worth making.
The op, in his attempts at censorship and his open support for persecution BY Christians, has made it quite clear that this thread has never been concerned with religious persecution, but rather, part of his Islamophobic campaign
That he has a loyal supporter in that campaign in your willingness to be part of that campaign - a loyal Bunter to his Lord Peter Wimsey, may be quaintly touching - but it brings you down to his sewer level.
I trust you have no objections to that fact
Jim Carroll