Jack B,

I don't recall persecuting you, I do recall discussing something that you said that I did not like with you. As I recall it, you gave as good as you got.

As for "shaming you into being polite." Max has shamed me into being much much more polite than I was. If I was rude to you I am sorry. But I am glad that you and I are now more polite.

"who unlike some scardy cats on this forum are embrace their beliefs"

should be

"who, unlike some scardy cats on this forum, embrace their beliefs"

I meant that the people on the Militant Atheists forum act like militant atheists (the modern definition) and are proud to be called that. While there are a couple of people on this forum who embrace the philosophy but deny that "Militant Atheism" even exists. Which makes them more like pete than anyone else on this forum. pete acts like someone who cares about science but denies the evidence, even when you virtually shove it in his face. Certain members of this forum deny simple concepts like militant atheism and forum rules even when they are shown examples of such things repeatedly.

I am not saying that what pete is doing is bad. I really admire him for his patience and faith. (though I feel the faith in Ken Ham and his confederates is misplaced.) It's up to the rest of us to politely judge for ourselves the veracity of his claims. I find it a little ironic that some of the same people who complain about free speech are people who will try to shout down pete pretty much every time he enters the conversation.

The people who vilify pete, blindly share the same blinkered doggedness that they vilify.