Oh no, Cerek, I finally found something we disagree on!
I *do* have a problem with an overt mixing of church and state in that it applies to actively putting forth a set of values which may not reflect the majority. Evolution vs. creationism comes to mind as a minor example. In the now infamous case in KS, certain schools tried to throw out all scientific teaching of anything resembling evolution because it was 'ungodly'. BIG mistake and they ended up making a laughing-stock of themselves. Some schools still refuse to teach evolution based on religious beliefs, but a public school cannot by law do so.
The religious groups who lobby for new laws involving animal treatment and civil rights are fine since they act for the good of all. But the ones who advocate, for example, returning America to some ideal of a religious utopia under a highly specified set of *their* version of religious doctrine is harmful to the populace at large since it does not reflect the majority--it reflects only those who have the funding to make a public presence known. *I* do not want nor do I wish my children to be forced to act or not act in a certain manner simply because the Powers That Be have decided it goes against what they believe God has said. Imagine if (really silly tho not implausible example
) pagans came into power somehow through lobbying and it was mandated that *everyone* observe the four Quarter festivals and four cross-quarter ones as well as monthly esbats.....
The division between church and state, while the line has become blurred over the years, is a very important distinction and one which should be maintained.