Richard Rorty skriver i ”Religion As Conversation-stopper” (i boken Philosophy and Social Hope, s. 171):

The main reason religion needs to be privatized is that, in political discussion with those outside the relevant religious community, it is a conversation-stopper. Carter is right when he says:

One good way to end a conversation – or to start an argument – is to tell a group of well-educated professionals that you hold a political position (preferably a controversial one, such as being against abortion or pornography) because it is required by your understanding of God’s will.

Saying this is far more likely to end a conversation than to start an argument. The same goes for telling the group, ”I would never have an abortion” or, ”Reading pornography is about the only pleasure I get out of life these days.” In these examples, as in Carter’s, the ensuing silence masks the group’s inclination to say, ”So what? We weren’t discussing your private life; we were discussing public policy. Don’t bother us with matters that are not our concern.”

Rorty argumenterar alltså, helt rätt, anser jag, för att religion inte ska utgöra grund för politisk konversation. Som jag tolkar det har också Kristdemokraterna anammat den hållningen: de motiverar inte sina hållningar med religiösa argument numera. De har insett att det sätter punkt för all meningsfull konversation.