[metesky]

“Democrats should call all this for what it is – a clear and present danger to religious liberty in America,” Reich writes. “For more than 300 years, the liberal tradition has sought to free people from the tyranny of religious doctrines that would otherwise be imposed on them. Today’s evangelical right detests that tradition and seeks nothing short of a state-sponsored religion. But maintaining the separation of church and state is a necessary precondition of liberty.”

Liberal midget trying to rewqrite history.

Until around 1830, well after the Constitution was written, both Massachusetts and Virginia required that tax money be used to support Christian churches, Baptists in Virgina and Congregationalists in Massachusetts.

[Sam Cree]

”Reich writes. 'For more than 300 years, the liberal tradition has sought to free people from the tyranny of religious doctrines that would otherwise be imposed on them. Today’s evangelical right detests that tradition..."

Interestingly, today's "liberals" and today's Democrats also detest that tradition.

"Until around 1830, well after the Constitution was written, both Massachusetts and Virginia required that tax money be used to support Christian churches, Baptists in Virgina and Congregationalists in Massachusetts."

My understanding is that the freedom of religion clause in the First Amendment (I like that term much better than the "seperation of church and state" clause) still is not considered to apply to the states. Yet, IMO, the idea of citizens being taxed to subisidize religion flys in the very face of the ideals for which the USA, was founded, individual freedom, which includes freedom of religion.