Blurring the meanings of words, sliding them together, and saying that because some blurred areas overlap and look similar, they're the same thing. Then they pull the words apart, put them back into focus, and act as if it's proven they are the same.

It's often done with different definitions of the word "belief," for instance.

But in this case, those who wish to exploit equivocation to make patriotism the same as Christianity or Islam, are unwittingly doing a great disservice to their religion. They are neglecting the core part of the religion - the belief in a supernatural god who has (allegedly) dictated the set of rules and rituals and beliefs.

I mean, if someone wants to argue that both "religions" have absolutely no supernatural component, they are free to do so and I wouldn't dispute that point - but again, that's clearly not a point that a believer wants to make.

In a very real way, such claims act as secularization of religious belief, rather than the way they were intended. If Christians want to say that our system of government is the same as religion, then so be it. If their focus is not on their deity, but on ceremonies and behavior, then perhaps they're right. But then, their religion has lost its core beliefs, it seems to me.

Robert Bellah's "civil religion" was simply a poorly argued, sub-logical attempt at establishing a sort of equivalency. But, he's dead now, so can no longer defend his writings.

This was by design as in 1776 the populace would have never accepted a godless state. Instead a god that didn't care about them was inserted so a secular union could be created.

Those who point to references to a higher power in the foundation documents tend to ignore this reality and most do so in order to further the false idea we are a "Christian nation".

It's important to remember the founders of this country saw the marriage of organized religion and government as the antithesis to power by and for the people. Those who seek to get those two things back together again aren't doing anyone any favors, including theists.

exist in our founding documents. That was by design, as well. The "creator" mentioned is a featureless, meaningless deity, if it is a deity at all. "Nature" is as likely that "creator" as some supernatural entity of some sort.

Specifically, no mention of Christianity occurs in any of our founding documents. If this nation was meant to be a "Christian nation," the clever fellows who came up with our founding documents would have at least hinted at that, you'd think. They were very bright men.

only one identified as a Christian.

The concept of civil religion typically includes aspects of civic life being treated as sacrosanct, e.g. George Washington being revered in an almost saintlike way, or our refusal to speak ill of our founding fathers when they most assuredly deserved it. So, I think it is valid to say that Americans treat their civil symbols, texts, and figures in almost religious fashion.

What our mutual friend doesn't seem to realize is this doesn't speak well of religion at all. Or that most of us, as humanists and freethinkers, would oppose it all the same.

I don't think it is prevalent or a majority opinion. Many people give lip service to patriotism, but scarcely even know anything about our system of government. We don't study the Constitution, for example, like scripture. Many of our elected officials appear to have no familiarity with that document at all. We're poor worshipers, if we worship at all at the civil altar.

People don't know anything about the government in the same way most Christians don't really know anything about the Bible. It isn't necessary. Christians still regard their faith as true, and I think most Americans still regard their government as teh bestest government evar.

As for whether or not this sort of thing is broad in its acceptance, I think I have a pretty effective way of testing it out: Just walk into any crowded public place and scream "George Washington was an asshole!" at the top of your lungs.

Instead of imagining some kind of pseudo religion that props up society, it's probably more accurate to say that is what's holding us back. Whenever you hold something in such high esteem that it's immune from criticism, all you have really done is take one of the worst aspects of religion and applied it to a secular purpose. All it really does is paves the way for all sorts of narrow minded thinking like American exceptionalism and "love it or leave it".

I understand your insistence, and the rationale behind it.

What does my signature line say, Guy?

The words 'civil' and 'religion' are both derived from Latin. The Romans had a civil religion. It was woven into how the city/empire ran. The Roman Catholic pope uses the title 'pontifex' because that indicated the official position of being the head of the priests in Rome. Julius Caesar held it.

It certainly doesn’t require a supreme being. I get what Bellah was describing with the term. There is in fact in our culture a set of nationalistic beliefs rituals and ceremonies- and ‘civil religion’ seems an appropriate label. The US version is also heavily infused with Christian tropes. Recall all the “god bless America” sing alongs after 9-11. Our politicians have to work god into every speech.

for most people. For that reason, I dislike its use in referring to political realities. Words matter.

it was the subject of that other thread.

are piggybacking on top of a real religion - Christianity, of course. When "God Bless America" is sung, there's a specific god they are singing about. Ask the super-patriotic people about the USA, and they will invariably mention that we are god's favorite country or specially blessed by god or facing danger if we don't follow god's rules. The religious extremism in patriotism has its roots in ACTUAL religion.

But other nations have similar national rituals and those need not be.

Most people don't know much about the theology of their religion. If religion were just about theology, it would be as boring as any other academic subject. But people do enjoy ceremonies, music and social events and celebrating in a common purpose. The stated purpose is less important than the fact it is a shared event that brings them together.

So I view the term "civil religion" as more of an analogy than an actual religion. It's an American ritual to watch fireworks on Independence Day, because it something enjoyable we do with other Americans. It's a bit similar to a religious ritual, but it's entire secular

to be "State Religion" like the C of E in the UK.

The separation of Church and State would make that difficult, I presume.

Although there could be an argument that Christianity is the defacto State Religion of the USA.