This is in response to Ambrose Flynn’s letter (Nov. 13) which discussed separation of church and state from a negative perspective, using reasons such as “strength in unity” and “soul and body.”

Our question would be, out of the various thousands of religious denominations, which one would be chosen to be wedded to the state? Further, where would citizens then stand with the constitutionally guaranteed freedoms of religion and speech?

Since 1776, this nation has achieved a relative stability between religious groups because of separation of church and state, while many of the religion-based governments around the globe have sectarian strife, friction or humanitarian issues. The case for separation of church and state seems to be already justified by historical example, especially in view of our diverse populace.

Lothar and Holly Bachmann, Auburn