Kathryn, you write that “making an issue” of Jindal’s participation “will only further demonstrate the hostility to free exercise of religion their candidate represents.” If I may say so, I don’t think that’s quite correct. Nobody (I would hope) is challenging Jindal’s right to participate in such a rite, but it is perfectly fair to wonder what that participation says about the governor, just as it is perfectly fair to wonder what the nature of any candidate’s religious faith or lack of religious faith says about them. After all, so far as I am aware, this is not an experience that Governor Jindal has ever disavowed or put down to his youth. In a sense that would be the easy way out. I suspect that the governor is not the sort of man that takes easy ways out.
More generally, we frequently argue around here that there should be a role for religion in the public square, and, in fact, there is. That’s as it should be. But the public square is an unruly place, not an ecumenical rally. And that’s as it should be too.