Sorry, in my experience people use only one example either because it is the only example they have (and therefore not really an example), or because they are just putting it out there as a hypothetical, which it what you did. You presented the thread with the hypothetical example of a non-secular atheist (which insofar as atheist means merely denial of divinity is not non-sensical, but I assumed you meant denial of superstition, which is a common-place usage, though incorrect), which seems an absurdity to me.
Quote:
It was hardly the most pivotal point I was making.
Nor did I declare it to be. The fact that that was the only thing I dealt with from that post must show you that I either agreed with enough of your post to leave it unchallenged apart from a jab at an amusing contradiction, or that if I did have disagreements with it, that they were dealt with in replying to earlier posts.
My jab at that comment was hardly the most pivotal point
I was making, however, if that jab was offensive to you, please tell me, and I will refrain from doing such in the future.
On the other hand, that was the only thing of yours I attacked, and you want to avenge your injured honour, such would have been better served by you taking on some of my other points, rather than something so small and inconsequential.
Hopefully we can leave
that bit behind us and if there is to be discussion or argument, it can be about something important.
smile 
