This wasn't some highly technical "gotcha," dude, so if you're being dismissive I don't see why.
It's just that I really
don't care about (apparently?) strictly defined terms relating to logic, so was using the term in a very informal sense. So the appearance of a dense block of prim black-coated disapproval was not entirely anticipated.
Specifically a claim was made that religious persecution by the well-known atheist state the Soviet Union does not count because the attempt by this atheist state to impose atheism at the point of a gun was not motivated by atheism but by other considerations. Which is, for the record, total trash. This bogus and historically illiterate argument was made in the context of a claim about violence almost never being motivated by atheism (a claim that, like it or not, is untrue).
All of which is a
bit odd because if there was a 'political' motivation to these murders it looks (I've not followed closely so could be missing several very important things) to be primarily anti-Muslim (I would use the word 'racist' but Americans get weirded out by uses of that word that postdate the 19th century).
