Fionn, top notch comment. State religion is the problem. If it's down to each person's interpretation of the Bible, and everyone must live as best they can, then that's fine. But once it's a state religion, then laws MUST be drafted from the holy texts, bcos the holy texts MUST be right - it's provided by God, and God can't be wrong. And that fixes the whole country to follow that specific interpretation of the rules. Once it's fixed for the whole country, then it's the country's responsibility to ensure that everyone follows it, so you get indoctrination going(family/school/friends/TV/whatever) to make sure everyone not only follows that interpretation, but believes that any other interpretation is wrong and/or evil. And strict parents or a strict community can do just as good a job, too.

If you're lucky then you get a man at the top to allow the rules to bend over time. But to become the man at the top requires you to have followed the specific interpretation better than everyone else, so don't expect too much change when they get there! Popes, Ayatollahs and some Jewish leaders (a certain Ariel Sharon springs to mind) don't have too good a record on this.

So - state religion, no. Bush worries me by saying that he's going to incorporate Christianity into the law. Which bits? Come to that, which Christianity? You'd think that seeing the results of strict "Christianity" (in inverted commas; that is, following the teachings of strict preachers who call themselves Christians, not following the teachings of Christ strictly) in the past would be disincentive enough.

Graham.