In a Washington Post editorial today, Charles Lane decries the rhetorical extremes that characterize much of today’s political debate, including a personal pet peeve of mine: the idea that reasonable views of church-state separation amount to a “war on religion.”
Crying “war on women” probably doesn’t attract many Republicans or independents to the Democratic cause. But that’s not the point. The point is to fire up the Democratic base. Ditto for the GOP and “Obama’s war on religious freedom.”
…
When you think of someone as an enemy, it’s harder to contemplate trusting, respecting or cooperating with him or her. Indeed, those behaviors start to look like treason, instead of what they really are: the minimum requirements of democratic life.
Not only is it uncivil and counter-productive to reasonable debate, claims that church-state separation is a “war on religion” simply don’t withstand scrutiny. We should be able to debate about the exact shape and reach of our religious liberties without being portrayed as somehow anti-religion.
