I should have known back when they started their swing to "anti-sjw" bullshit that atheists would end up going against secularism. I feel a classic atheist thread coming on, lol.

I was recently reminded- I forget by who- of that time in 2017 a Christian "charity" got courts to remand drug addicts to them for "treatment" at a "farm" in lieu of prison sentences. Actually they just got them to work in a chicken processing plant as slave labor and threatened

to send them to jail if they didn't play along. https://www.grubstreet.com/2017/10/drug-users-sentenced-to-big-chicken-labor-camps.html

I could find you a hundred such abuses by Christian "charities" with a morning's googling. And this is of course not to say that secular charities are flawless. They are not.
Don't get me started on charities in general, lol.
But a separation of church and state is important for

a myriad of reasons.
People all over the world manage to do really well with the concepts "God isn't real" and "people have rights" without finding these things to have any internal contradictions. People have "rights" because we decided that societies built on this premiss work

better and are the kinds of societies we want to live in, moreso than societies which do not (which tend to be disastrous).
Its not even hard. I don't need to believe in a God to want to live in a just and equitable society.

Weinstein's concern here is contradictory, though. He worries that secularism is "scalable and communicable". So it is implied here that what a God does is set a limit on just how many rights you have. You can't just get together with the other people in the society and say,

"hey, maybe we should extend these things to women or gay people", or "maybe when you think about it, access to healthcare is an important aspect of these rights that we haven't really considered" or what have you.
But if God sets the rules, He sets the limits (or rather, His

human emissaries do and everyone else can go fuck themselves".
Weinstein worries that people will start asking "why" questions. But, well, why?
If someone asked "why isn't it my right to smack old ladies at random"? or something like that, we could tell them why that is not

a right, and if someone asks "who gets to decide", the answer is "we do, together".
But its starting to look like "we" are too "woke" for the tastes of Weinstein and Rubin. They see that they are outnumbered, most people want people to be housed and have food and healthcare and

education and safety. They want this for everybody, brown people and lady people and trans and non-binary people and, well, everyone, and that wanting is only getting stronger as people come together. They are marching in the streets about this shit, they are winning elections.

We would win even more if they let a little more democracy happen around this country.
They don't have a good argument against this, and if there's one solution to not having a good argument in this world, it's God.
I'd like to let you get married, but God says no. I'd like to

give you the life-saving healthcare you need, if it were up to me... but of course it's not. Its up to God.
Now get your ass back in the chicken factory before we send you to prison for being a drug addict- we have a status quo to protect, motherfuckers.