根本上我们甚至没有zhengjiao分离

感觉太mingan了，就用的英文。可以直接google翻译

One reason why China is still in the pre-enlightenment stage, is that we have not actually achieved a separation between politics and religion. This view may seem strange to many people, because we have always preached that we are an atheistic nation. Suppose we have no separation between politics and religion, what kind of religion do we believe in?

For the time being, I will not explain what "religion" we believe in, but will choose to argue from the opposite side first. It is easy to observe that China enforces very strict restraint policies on religion.We classify a large number of religions into the category of cults, strictly restrict the free activities of Buddhism, Christianity, Islam, etc., and try to bring them into the category of patriotism.

We can easily explain these policies from a secular perspective. But I want everyone to realize that such a policy of religious oppression is actually seen in all countries without state-and-religion-separation, such as modern（近代）Japan, Russia, and Iran ---- it may be hard to say that they all believe in a classic religion. The key to "separation of politics and religion" or "state religion" is not a certain supernatural belief, but a patriarchal authority trying to monopolize the right to interpret truth.The fundamental reason to suppress religion is that religion is dangerous. Religion means faith and action for faith, which is likely to deviate from the purpose set by authority.

The reason for religious freedom is not that religion is good or that people should have some sort of transcendent belief. Freedom of religion is actually freedom of conscience. We should be free to believe what we are willing to believe, and act in accordance with our conscience of what we believe and explain. And this is deadly for all totalitarian states with state religion.

Finally, returning to the previous question, what is our de facto state religion? I believe the answer is patriotism. Patriotism is a civic religion, and love, loyalty, and belief in the country become absolute truths. This may not be unusual, after all, all state religions will bind themselves to the particularity of the nation, such as the Russian Orthodox Church. That is why we are firmly opposed to interpreting the Constitution as a civic religion (perhaps as Rousseau), which fundamentally violates the freedom of conscience of the First Amendment to the US Constitution. The constitution and the state are not a belief, but, as Holmes said, "the constitution is made for people with fundamentally different opinions."