A recent poll by Harvard University scholars states that religion is playing a more important role in shaping students’ political leanings. Half of the students surveyed were worried about the moral direction of the country, yet, predictably, party allegiances influenced views about whether religion should be a factor in government policy.

Fifty-six percent of Republicans thought [religion] should [play a larger role], but only about 20 percent of Democrats agreed.

The poll found that college students did not fall neatly along liberal and conservative lines. While the largest group of students was still traditional liberals (44 percent), the numbers of religious centrists (25 percent) and traditional conservatives (16 percent) have grown in the past year. The number of secular centrists (15 percent) has declined.

How would those advocating more religion in public policy feel if their religious sympathies were in the minority? Would the Christian Coalition and Moral Majority folks be comfortable if Hindutva was suddenly ascendant? How would Pat Robertson feel if Islamists starting winning congress seats and advocating Sharia law? Not that any of this will ever happen, but considering how the political environment would look if the shoe were on the other foot is important.

Wouldn’t the “Christianists” (Andrew Sullivan’s new term) be up in arms and extolling the virtues of secular government and pluralism if their particular theology was suddenly on the outs. Well that’s how everyone else feels now about their heavy-handed God-shoving. Notions of secular politics are important not just to keep religion out of policy making, but to ensure that all citizens have the right to practice their faiths without the government event thinking about it. Pushy theo-cons (sorry, another Sullivanism) should consider how they would feel if some other religion were wielding the levers of power. Then they would love secularism and separation of church and state.