There are obviously a few things you still need to learn. Let me give it the old college try!

• Yes, obviously I don't know what your world view is, and that's why I never talked about your world view. What I said was that you're trying to defend an absurdly implausible world view, and that world view is any theistic one. Reading comprehension would have helped you avoid this misunderstanding.
• When you defend Catholicism or in fact pretty much any brand of Christianity, Original Sin is completely essential, because without it Christianity is pointless. Do you need me to draw you a picture?
• No, it's not at all obvious that Jesus added his spin to Judaism. It is however extremely obvious that Paul did. From what poor evidence we have, we can see that the faith Jesus preached was Judaism, which includes his own role as prophesied in the OT as the bringer of the apocalypse. By way of confirmation, in Matt 5:18 he proclaims that "not one jot nor tittle" of the original law is to change; it is Paul who contradicts him in Romans 10:4 (and other places, as do the other Gospels).
• If you have evidence that religion is not on the wane especially in developed countries as I said, then you might as well present it. Failing that, you're just making a bunch of noise.
• If you were trying to help me be more correct, thanks for the good intentions. I've explained why your execution was not helpful, for lack of knowledge on your part. I was hoping you'd find my corrections informative.
• How did I insult you? By pointing out your lack of knowledge in the areas you're talking about? Well, that puts me into the dilemma of either insulting you or humoring you by agreeing to your false claims - I feel the latter would be the biger insult. If you insist on a pat on the head, you need to get it from someone who isn't qualified to correct you.
• Similarly, if you consider being contradicted "a-hole behavior" then I would say you're not sufficiently mature to participate in discussions in this forum.