Libtard RATS interpret the law as freedom from Religion, not Freedom of Religion.
It is not sustainable, but radically secular is what the United States us, thanks to its protestant reformation and enlightenment roots.
This is a thought provoking piece. Thank you for posting it.
The secular state is a fairly new invention, and its ability to function over the long term or even medium term is very much in doubt. As long as the culture that under-girds it holds up (meaning that it’s actually secular only in an official sense) it can chug along. Once that is gone, in favor of something like “diversity”, there is no way it can help but become tyrannical. The United States was a Christian country, despite any interpretation of anything in the Constitution. That required some conformity that was mostly not enforced by the government, but by society. To the extent the government did participate, it was as an extension of the culture. As that culture is degraded and eroded, we are in uncharted territory. The Left seized the media and the schools for that very reason, and have made huge inroads in the churches.
There are some essential principles of our society, that is supposed to be a republican-democracy. One of the most important, but not often thought of, is that, in their wisdom, our founding fathers knew from previous experience that written words are subverted before the ink is dry.
So they set up the organization of our government with many balances of people in groups with competing interests, in the idea that they would help “to keep each other honest” in following the written law. Not a perfect system, but not bad. And certainly better than any known alternative.
But though this exists in all societies, this highlighted the obvious: that government pays attention to the needs and wants of the majority, and the larger minority factions among the public.
Yet they only do so with “The squeaky wheel gets the grease” attitude. A majority or a larger minority may be powerful, but unless they assert their rights, their rights are ignored.
And all of that is background to a discussion of religion in America.
From its founding, the US government has continued to grow in power. But not power in a vacuum. That is, for it to have *more* power, the states and the citizenry must have *less* power.
This means that only when the states and the citizenry, and yes, religion, asserts their rights, will the US government back off, at least sometimes. But if they *do not* assert their rights, they lose them. And the pressure is constant.
At the founding of the republic, births of children were registered in churches. But today, government registers all births, at the state and federal level, and religion is cut out of the deal. Churches no longer register births for the most part.
So religion allowed government to take that sacrament away from them.
At the founding of the republic, marriages were also registered in churches. But government has now taken that away from religion, declaring that only government approved marriages are official. And religion let them.
At the founding of the republic, deaths were registered by churches. Now even death is absorbed by ever growing government, and certainly the paperwork of death.
And religion has let them do this as well.
Government continues to take over the functions of religion, but only does so because religion does not stand up and resist, but meekly renders its authority unto Caesar.
In China, the government appoints all religious leaders in the Christian faith. For anyone else to preach is a serious crime.
Is that contemplated in the US? Yes it is. The IRS is now trying to control the speech from the pulpit, at first only to forbid political speech. (And in Canada, to prohibit speech against homosexuality). But eventually, the government will demand the authority to control sermons and religious doctrines, under the basic principle, “Because we can!”
And, if religion continues to be a willing slave, the government will oblige. It will only stop, and not stop, but to retake their authority, if religions stand up and show some backbone.
It makes you wonder if they have them.
The secular state has abandoned even the appearance of neutrality and favors the religion it fears violence from over the religion that criticizes it.