This blog post offers something that might be regarded as a startling insight. I regard the Roman emperors who outlawed Christianity, or more particularly, the Christian Church (before Constantine). to actually have been correct in this particular prohibition. By doing so. they were actually protecting the best interests of the state.
Ethical Monotheists believe in only ONE transcendent Source, and in one authority chain following from it, for all real authority — wherever its jurisdiction may situate. This would (and does) preclude any church from having authority, in addition to that of the state. Indeed, the “paper pope” of the Protestants, and the real one of the Catholics, both pretend authority beyond that of the state, implying a clear and distinct challenge to the former, if and when they disagree — or are interpreted by church leaders so to do. Even their own “Bible” makes clear the “incommensurability of paradigms” here — one with Jesus as a living emperor (a false emperor and a fiction on the SEM view represented here), having authority over churchgoers in every land, as well as that paradigm of the real state authority, which has no such emperor ruling within its boundaries — the USA does not allow either kings or emperors to act within their office, exercising authority from it, within its borders.
This precludes Jesus (assuming hypothetical the Christian view) from exercising any authority as emperor on US soil. This implies a ban on Christianity, since such exercise of authority is implied by their (illegal) baptism, which comes with the confession that “Jesus is Lord” — where “Lord” means “Son of God, and highest human authority.” The prohibtion of the USA against domestic kingship and the like aims at forbidding the conflict of material interest involved necessarily in having two separate chains of authority in any one land.
The separation of Church and State was a good start in the USA (Brown v. Board of Education, etc), but it does not go nearly far enough to protect the actual authorities from the usurpation of such forbidding incursions against real authority.
Fathers should shepherd the family, not churches. And the state should have its authority protected.
More on this topic later.