Eudea wrote:Region of Dwipantara wrote:Depend on the definition of 'protect'. For the majority of us, it meant "protect any religion from being quashed by the state". For him, maybe "greatly support a very specific strain of a specific religion using taxpayer's money at the expense of the rest of the non-Catholic majority whose belief is quashed by government power."
I personally see it more as protecting the citizenry and the state from religious fanaticism infesting government policy.
It goes both way, which is why secularism is objectively better for civilization.



