This is a political forum. Recognizing how religious demographics affect party platforms is certainly important to understanding the politics of the United States. The Christian Coalition is a political group. CAIR is a political group. When religion enters the realm of politics, you could and should discuss the impacts, provided you are not invalidating a particular group's political beliefs based on their religion. The opposite is also true. If politics enters the realm of religion, you could and should discuss why this is happening, without using your own religious preferences as a catalyst to undermine others. There were no claims made for or against any religion. No one discussed any religious beliefs. Saying religion is the same as religious demographics is akin to claiming that nature is the same as global warming.

"We weren't discussing religion, we were just discussing how religious demographic voting blocks shape politics."

"We weren't discussing education, we were discussing the impact of AR15 restrictions would affect school shootings."

"We weren't discussing nature, we were discussing the effectiveness of the Paris Agreement on global warming."

These are all the same type of argument. If nature or education were sensitive subjects, you would completely stifle political discussion by equating the former with the latter in each instance above. If you can't make that distinction, that's on you. I guess post count takes precedent over nuance when it comes to selecting moderators.

I've said my piece. I still don't know who deleted my posts and the follow up thread. I'll just assume it was you, which is comforting. I should let everyone go back to talking past one another with regards to net neutrality.

---