[Aquinasfan]

Such was the heritage of the preceding one thousand years. Two hundred or even fifty years ago, it would have seemed quite impossible, in America, that an individual be granted boundless freedom with no purpose, simply for the satisfaction of his whims.

I wonder if this outcome is the necessary, logical outcome of our system of government, particularly the idea of a religiously indifferent government. It seems to me that nations with established churches (like England), but which tolerate other religions, are more intellectually coherent regimes.

[Mmmike]

I would dare say the American system has overextended itself in a reach for the abstraction that is pure civic secularism. But I think it was almost inevitable; many Americans inject a great deal of self-assertion into their religious views, creating an existential tension within the society that makes it **seem** like government has to leapfrog that tension by secularizing itself beyond the reach of the internecine religious differences, whereas I would say finding a solution begins by questioning the role of self-assertion in what should be a subordination of self so that truth can be more clearly discerned.