were issues still worth killing your neighbors over. And that was after religious disputes had toned down in Europe in general, and England in particular.
The idea that the Constitution represents a consensus Christian view is nonsense; there was (and is) no consensus. Keeping religion out of government was probably the only way the Colonies could ever have formed a unified gov't -- and remember, it took two tries to achieve success.
George III's father (George II, natch) had fought off a Catholic pretender to the throne only a few decades previously. Protestant supporters said they "would rather see the fez of the Turk on the throne" than to return to a Catholic monarchy. So no, there was no hand-holding and singing among a bunch of happily unified Christians. Religious addicts who want to see religion take over gov't always believe, on the basis of absolutely nothing, that it will be their version of Christianity which controls the levers of power, and not some version supported by anyone outside of their narrow, immediate community -- even when their denomination is a minor one with a very short history, greatly outnumbered by everyone else -- and with nothing like the numbers, wealth, and political experience (including insider deals and other dirty fighting) of the Roman Catholic Church. Keep pushing for a religious takeover, folks, and you'll find yourselves referring to the POTUS as "his Holiness". We've had enough of that already.
= new reply since forum marked as read