Submitted to a Candid World features a great piece today that discusses how sometimes a little religion is okay for government functions, etc if the context is correct. I love this concept and I think if more people felt this way on the Left, and less people tried to push past this line on the Right, we would all be a lot better off.

Perhaps surprisingly, I would uphold both ceremonial uses of religious imagery, on the grounds that the threat of sending an exclusionary message is minimal when the dominant theme of a religious icon or expression is historical or cultural rather than evangelical. In these hypotheticals, both the Battle Hymn and the Altar of Victory have unique places in the consciosness of their respective populations owing to their antiquity, not their religiosity. While this position places at odds with many of my liberal compatriots, I’m in good company. In 2005, Justice Breyer cast the tiebreaking vote in two “Ten Commandments on the courthouse steps” cases, distinguishing a monument with great antiquity (therefore valid – see Van Orden) from a monument placed seemingly only to inflame religious and “make a point” (therefore invalid – see McCreary).

Being in a pluarlist society not only requires us to avoid using the state to place one religion over the other; it also requires us to tolerate cultural expressions that might carry with them a twinge of religiosity. We cannot expunge religion wholesale from the public sphere, without depriving ourselves of valuable reminders of our heritage.

As promised, Ames has earned his wings and I’ve moved him over to the Board Certified Progressives section of our blogroll. This doesn’t mean I expect him to be a Progressive all the time (god knows I’m not) but what it DOES mean is that our readers can trust Ames to put wisdom and logic over partisanship, which is the halmark of a good Progressive.

Good job Ames!