Back about 1976, there arose this amorphous effort in Europe and the USA which represents broadly that if said lands would just "know their places" respectively and collectively, as well as downplay or rid themselves of their Christian faiths, a smorgasbord of liberty, mass opportunities for growth, and security would be theirs for all time; the same geezers today banging such drums were at the forefront, and since have brought in new blood to their ranks (e.g., Barack Obama). Gosh, at so many levels, that seems to be baloney, big-time.
 
But that doesn't stop the current malarkey about USA religion: "hey, want State faith based? Teach and enforce only this mot du jour, it helps national security or whatever's topical at the moment, and anybody not going to Church is of interest and will be watched generally as potential Laden-like fundamentalists...duhhhh, yeah, even if it's Byzantine Christianity the Muslim world terrorists have always hated, and we're tearing down Western faiths to install Byzantines while deconstructing borders and defense forces. Come on! Buddy boy Bill Maher just called the Roman Catholics a child abuse club and Nazis again, and we can USE that...yeeaarrrrrggghhhhh!!!!".
 
Now, it has never and does not now matter(ed) to me WHAT anyone on earth wants to have or not have in re religious beliefs; Roman Catholicism has always worked for me, I'll offer anyone interested info on it, and don't get flustered because someone says "no". I don't care if someone would rather blow their nose on the concept of God, believe God is that catty coolster in the candle-adorned mirror, or prefers to practice from a litany of humanly known faiths. But these days, so many are so ready to keep State education and faith funds coming that they'll even expel an innocent kindergartner for having a "Jesus Loves You" pencil; at the same time, I understand I'm simply not at innocent liberty to simply say "no" to my archdiocese re attendance if the Host is "adored" in a can and the archdiocese will support teaching homosexuality as an alternate lifestyle (even DEMOCRATS know that's not true) to be explored by youth while otherwise collectivizing Hispanics, other immigrants, and nationals...to some, "zat iss very interesting", and I don't mean to Benedict XVI.
 
And there's spin saying how can you be FOR Benedict XVI yet not want aimless, economy-destroying mass immigration that only weakens remaindermen in countries of origin...as if to say BENEDICT is behind such mass immigration, unless Bill Maher infers otherwise.   
 
Wherefore, all I wish to conclude re my observations of religion and politics for 2008 is that especially given such within aforesaid palavers, I worry what other leaders will say about government money going into USA religion to effect government agendas; I cite homegrown example PFAW saying the other month government faith money pushes agendas, and homegrown example Pelosi re China being such an intermeddler with religion...both homegrowns pushing their own buttons, unlike say China not yet connected to a "red" button.
 
Other than that, I think government money should be better spent on defense, education and economic diplomacy rather than faith funding as shinola for something unrelated apparently not working very well. As it is, about all we get otherwise are admonitions to fear a litany of everday "possible harms" from pre-school to going for a walk or seeing a mosquito, with going green played as financially secure progress rather than making do with reducing options as all status quos rapidly deepen.