"Revisiting the Cult of the Supreme Being"
"The tradition of Spinoza, Rousseau, and Robespierre provides a promising alternative for positive conceptions of the good in civic life.
Instead of the liberal doctrine of the separation between church and state, these figures promoted the institutionalization of a secular morality to strengthen popular sovereignty and combat injustice. They all addressed oppression and social alienation in contrast to the elitist “New Atheist” approach of directly attacking the religious beliefs of the poor and the marginalized as a political solution."
https://www.jacobinmag.com/2016/01/robespierre-rousseau-religion-separation-church-state-kim-davis/
= new reply since forum marked as read
If I'm understanding the article correctly, it doesn't seem likely that the secular commonality proposed is feasible here. In the U.S., the transition hasn't been from a royal authority to that of an elected governmental authority with the same power to be the moral shot-caller. The U.S. model intentionally divested the government from having "sovereign authority" over moral matters, while tasking it with enforcement of laws based on religious proscriptions -- kind of crazy, when you think about it.
The majority of Christian denominations in the U.S. -- those to which I've been exposed at least -- rail against the slightest exercise of governmental direction in the moral arena -- even when the effect would be in keeping with the tenets of their faith. That's not likely to change, since there's big collection plate money to be had by making the government out to be Satan, which is ridiculous, of course. Satan is me (Kidding). 
