BCE/CE is accepted practice and widespread; in countries that are not predominantly Christian it is used nearly 100% of the time. IOW, no, you’re dead wrong.
“BCE/CE is accepted practice and widespread; in countries that are not predominantly Christian”
I understand the desire of those who don’t believe in Christ not to have to “affirm” him by using AD and BC; but, totally unrelated to that, there is currently a cultural attempt to repress Christian expression in the public square.
Therefore, the use of BCE and CE, at this particular time, is going to be misunderstood, and will be considered part of the same anti-Christian bias.
Hopefully all sides will show a bit of mutual understanding (and just as some don’t want to use BC and AD, others will, especially at this time, want to specifically emphasize those terms).
Well okay, I'll stipulate to the idea that it's widespread. Why is it widespread? Widespread among non-Christians and anti-Christians? That's maybe the most amazing notion of all. Why can't we define as CE the birth of Albert Gore Jr.? Did something significant happen at the beginning of the "Common Era" (CE) that made it different from "Before the Common Era," that warranted starting the clock of history all over again?
Cutting to the obvious here, saying "BCE" instead of B.C. is widespread as a purposeful denial of Christ. And yet at the same time, the "Christ deniers" among whom it is de rigeur can't escape the importance of His birth. It apparently resonates beyond the boundaries of one religious tradition, of history, and some would say, of destiny.
I have lived for decades in one foreign country and never heard or saw the term “BCE”, etc... I’ve lived elsewhere abroad too, but not as long - same experience.
This is a new thing, not something widely accepted and used. And it is being introduced by those who hate the Lord and don’t want to be reminded that we are in the year of our Lord since he has come and is risen.