Well said, Paul Blanchard

Surely the privacy in their own homes thing was a response to how often religion – C of E, usually – plays a role in public life. He mentioned the bishops in the House of Lords, but there are many other examples.

He sounds a reasonable chap - he can't stop responders talking rubbish on that site.

I am slightly squeamish about the word militant in relation to beliefs of any kind - even the ones I agree with.

No, I don't see why I would be allied with anybody else's posts, unless I said that I agreed with them.

You can't blame someone for what other people post....I think you probably could if the OP was deliberately inflammatory. That isn't the case here. But do you want to be allied in any way with people who post offensive comments?

No, I didn't read all the comments - why should I? Anybody can post a comment and they are often pretty stupid.

No reason why people shouldn't pray in their places of worship.

Or do I mean furtive?

Makes a change to have someone bravely proclaiming who is on the other side. Well, suppose there are quite a lot of such atheists about these days. Wouldn't have been so easy sixty years ago.

I had to smile at the comment 'in the privacy of their own homes' Lilygran. Makes praying sound intriguingly fertive.

You can hardly blame him for what other people post!

But only in the privacy of their own homes? And did you read all comments? Some of the Pro-Paul people I wouldn't want on my side!

I think the person who demanded that he explain his dismissal of religion had completely misunderstood his point (not unusual). He was saying only that believers of any religion should not be given special privileges not that they should not be able to practise their religion. I expect many liberal-minded believers would agree with him.

An excellent point, very well made by an extremely reasonable sounding man.

That's what I thought. Pleasant voice and accent are plusses too, just by the way.

He didn't look or sound very militant, but certainly made sense.