The separation of religion and state, a bedrock of the U.S. Constitution, dawned in Europe after the devastating religious wars of the early modern age. This separation evolved as new nation-states tried to solve the problem of how to tie together differing faith communities.

Nations with Islamic majorities had their share of religious wars as well. Shadi Hamid (“Post-Liberalism, East and West,” Foreign Affairs; 11 April 2018) writes: “Islam, in its original form, assumed that one’s primary allegiance was to a religious community rather than a nation.” This might also be said of Europeans in times past.

Europe moved toward state churches but with toleration of dissenters. Later, the newly formed United States moved to disestablish religion from government altogether.

Well-established nation-states progressed in many areas: rule of law; public health advances; public education; transportation infrastructures; and hosts of others.

However, even within the centuries old American model of separation of church and state, conflicts have arisen between religious communities and government. Example: Should parents who believe blood transfusions are wrong be required to let their dying child be treated with them?

Protestors against the Vietnamese conflict included religious leaders like Martin Luther King Jr. and Abraham Joshua Heschel. A continuing protest against excessive militarism involves present day religious leaders.

The growth of secularism in both Western and Middle Eastern societies has led to new conflicts between communities within nation states. New areas include abortion and gender issues.

These inevitable differences can be eased if those in conflict pledge civility and respect for those who differ from them. They agree that protests must be non-violent.

They recognize that no perfect society is possible. They accept tension as inevitable.