I'm afraid it's wishful thinking at this point. Secession would be more likely than any such reforms.
Secularism doesn't HAVE to be the perverted and convoluted concept we have today. It is so because we have allowed it to become this- what makes you so sure you can prevent it from happening in this hypothetical new christian nation?
By definition, Secularism is an incoherent worldview. Christian theism is by far the consistent worldview. The fact that the best worldview (and therefore basis for a government) could be abused by some does not change the fact that it is the best worldview (and basis for government). No system is above abuse. Secularism, by it's very definition, is a breeding ground for abuse.
I recommend the trancendental argument as enunciated by Greg Bahnsen and Cornelius Van Til for further a further development of this (see cmfnow.com).
Plain and simple what you have is a political platform, not a secessionist agenda.
False disjunct fallacy.
The changes you seek need to be implemented in the political context so that the greater moral goals can be achieved. Any other path will lead to ridicule and more perverted secularism - surely you can see that?
That's pretty much the view expressed towards those who argued for our declaration of independence. It is no more valid now than it was then. In fact, we have more justification to secede now. I grant it will be difficult. But, frankly speaking, many secularists would bless our "departure", so they might support it.
BTW- minor commments or your comments....of COURSE Christianity does not equal tyranny. tyranny is the domain of men, some of whom historically have used faith to further their aims.
The worst tyrants were those who based their actions on the faith of secularism (atheistic communism, etc.) to further their aims.
"False disjunct fallacy"
then that makes two of us.......
I haven't given up on this country. It's going to take more than a "trancendental argument" to turn me away.
It's really not very trancendental at all. Independence is won, not apathetically achieved (except maybe for Canada), and I don't think people will grant you your wished for christian state just to shut you up - especially since you don't really make too much sense. You are soon (if not already) to be relegated to the looney bin - like the Black Nationalists - who also wanted their own country.
I'm loathe to give you advice in this matter, but you would have better success looking at the Amish model in PA. who are allowed to pursue a "distinct society" within the confines of the overall secular state.
Even you may see the futility of your quest when you attempt to come up with a Constitution for this shangri-la, which I am assuming will be in the not too distant future. I look forward to reading it, and the debate within your movement.
Regards-