Well, for me it was talk of wanting religion out of the public forum and behind closed doors...
Seems fair enough, we want policy based upon demonstrable facts, not supernatural suspicions.
and religion being the root of all evil
Not the root of all evil, but demonstrably a net negative in the world.
and even religious moderates pose a danger.
They don't pose a direct danger, but they validate the nonsense that's used by religious fanatics to justify their atrocities.
OK If you don't mind that Enland still has a C of E established or not
I object - it's up there with having a hereditary head of state as something with a lack of an moral justification, but it's lower on the list of priorities than, say, sorting out education or the health and care services.
the Anglican community in England is still stuck with itself being by way of ties that are more familial than geographical.
The problem is that, as an establshed church, even if they want to leave they're still stuck with them, we all are.
if there is religion in the country should that not be acknowledged at the political level and should an attitude of secularise to get rid of the evil of religion, prevail?
Banning it is counterproductive, it just feeds the martyr complex that's baked into, particularly, the Abrahamic religions. Better to just hold the structures to account when needed, and then ignore them when they're casting their spells, and with time they'll just drift further and further into irrelevance. We don't need to 'get rid' of them, they'll just wither away on their own.
O.
