"The rules would prevent the person posting as Akenston from repeating the awful abhorrent hate he propagates, yet because he does it without the word "fuck" that's alright?"

The rules say that you are free to be anything but the five things listed. "Bigotted in the opinion of Ian. Is not on the list. It is very simple and clear.

I don't stereotype rational people. I have been saying that some people who claim to be atheists share some of traits that they abhor in people of faith. You and two others quickly identified yourselves as such and proceeded to prove my point over and over again. The two others are now behaving much more rationally, while you are refusing to read and understand a very simple and clear sentence written by the owner of this forum.   

As infuriating as pete's lack of logic is, He has not been unkind, he has not been impolite, he has not been argumentative, he has not been snooty toward you or anyone on this forum. You have been all of the above to many people. So have I. But when I realized it was against the rules, I stopped.

>>>If it's all the same to you, I'll keep taking the piss, you'll keep lobbing grenades and pete can keep questioning the age of the universe.<<<

No it is not all to same to me. As long as I am abiding by the rules I will ask see them enforced.

They are only grenades in your apparently confused mind. As I said, I said that "some people on this" forum behaved like the "militant atheists" that Van Der Wall, famous Atheist scientist, was describing. You and a couple of others reacted to that by picking a fight. I'll admit that when you insulted me I tried to police you with your own medicine. That was before I heard of and bought into the rule change.

pete and Ake and I and the several others you berate, have a right to be anything they want except for unkind, impolite, argumentative or snooty.

You have the right to the same. You have no right to try to police others by being unkind, impolite, argumentative or snooty. It is as simple as that.