“We have to base our law on something. It’s either God’s law or the law of something else, like secular humanism or Sharia. There is no such thing as religious neutrality. You are either promoting Christian values or you are promoting some other thing. “
There is an enormous distinction between promoting and endoctrinating. By legaly binding religion with the law, that’s endoctrination, not promotion. Sorry but the framing fathers created our legal framework based on a combination of legal references dating back to the 10th century BC, including the Bible. What you are saying puts the perspective of legislature in black and white where legal ideologies are typically in the gray. Leaning to one side encourages religious zealots to abuse power. Naturally many religions share common beliefs. The laws are here to enforce a level of civility and liberty, not endoctrinate citizens. The Bible is very clear that in order to be saved you must CHOOSE the path, not be forced to walk up it.
That’s why the existing system has and continues to work. It will never be perfect, but we are all free to practice whatever religion we want just about any time we want. And that’s always a great environment. If Christians can’t get it together in this kind of welcoming arena without ramming it down other people’s throats through political endoctrination, then perhaps we don’t deserve to prosper and save others; we’re not doing the work of Jesus this way. If anything we’re doing the exact same thing we’re blaming others of doing, i.e. Islamic nations.
The difference is that the US law is rooted in Judeo-Christian law, it is not, however Judeo-Christian law. We don’t open the Bible in a court of law and say, “Thous shalt not covet” or “thou shalt not have any other Gods before me.” That’s the difference and it’s a big difference. We have a very secular code of law that is, or at least was, rooted in Judeo-Christian law.