Interesting but I would rather see the opposite argument. I would only note that while erudite in finding the use of religion inherent in our system for the purpose of making materialism and money sacred, justifying religion in government on the assumption of Christianity as the lessor of the unavoidable religious evils attempts to win the debate by admitting the basic evil of all religions. And obviously assuming that secular liberals are not strong on defeating the evils of greed and materialism is a bit confusing as most of those profess some form of Christianity that is the basis of that greed and materialism. Given the remaining tendency to define religion in the medieval sense of late Roman Christianity neatly leaves out the great resurgence of spiritualism in Buddhist, Hindu, Pagan, and scientific thought that are, I think, best described as post religious. But that is probably ok as this is, then, limited to religion of the old form . . . . Sorry, just some thoughts.