religion in America has always functioned best from the margins, outside of the circles of power, and that any grasping for religious hegemony ultimately trivializes and diminishes the faith.
I'm not sure that's true. At least, I'm not sure that the word "always" is justified.
The Abolitionists took on slavery as "immoral", not "unworkable" or "inconsistent with liberty". Theirs was absolutely a religious movement, and most of the gatherings were held in churches. The frequent rallies held by Methodists in the North were decried by Methodists in the South, and led to the fissioning of that sect. ("Southern Methodist University", in Texas, is one of the few etymological relics left after reconciliation in the 20th century.)
Likewise, in the 1960s, the civil rights movement kept butting heads with the establishment; there were all sorts of objections and contorted arguments against integration. But (evangelical) Reverend Billy Graham (who was mostly conservative) took the hard line: he declared all segregation "immoral", and demanded of many to include a moral justification for continued segregation (which, of course, they could not provide).
We have a problem with religion in this country, but the solution is not "to keep religion in its place".
(no subject)
I'm not sure that's true. At least, I'm not sure that the word "always" is justified.
The Abolitionists took on slavery as "immoral", not "unworkable" or "inconsistent with liberty". Theirs was absolutely a religious movement, and most of the gatherings were held in churches. The frequent rallies held by Methodists in the North were decried by Methodists in the South, and led to the fissioning of that sect. ("Southern Methodist University", in Texas, is one of the few etymological relics left after reconciliation in the 20th century.)
Likewise, in the 1960s, the civil rights movement kept butting heads with the establishment; there were all sorts of objections and contorted arguments against integration. But (evangelical) Reverend Billy Graham (who was mostly conservative) took the hard line: he declared all segregation "immoral", and demanded of many to include a moral justification for continued segregation (which, of course, they could not provide).
We have a problem with religion in this country, but the solution is not "to keep religion in its place".