This is so way offtopic, but I'm going to have to bite.

Negative. You can research all you want and create as many new stem cell lines as you want. You just don't get government funding for it. Government funding is granted for the handful of stem cell lines, which is actually an improvement over what it was if you have no qualms with arbitrary definitions of human life. Why does Germany have a similar law? Because it is run by a bunch of radical Chrisitans, or because it has to deal with the specters of the likes of Mengele in its past?

It's all in the reasons. Whilst the Germans possibly formulated their bioethics arguments properly, the US ban on stem cell research was a religious fundie gut reaction aimed at winning brownie points with Bush's religious nutter support base. All of the most vocal arguments put forward against stem cell research have been basically of the same type as those coming from the anti-abortion camp. Only now, after substantial protest and significant wastage of researchers' time, the restrictions have been relaxed.

Which is why we're remaking both Afgahnistan and Iraq into Chrisitian nations by having them declare Islam the official religion... right...

Again, consider intent here. Bush is fixated on the Crusade mentality. While the main reason was most likely oil, a significant and unstated part of the Bush administration's reasoning was to shift the power balance in the Middle East, and that is something the Church has been wanting to do for quite a while.

Any attempt by government to enforce a seperation [sic] of church and state is itself a violation of the seperation of church and state. Removing legislation that does discriminates based on religion actually means FEWER laws that respect the establishment of religion.

That's complete rubbish and incomrehensible to boot. The Church and other religious (and quasi-religious) organisations tend to grow in power over time, and naturally as they grow bigger, the potential for interference with government affairs and the promotion of religious ideas and mores tends to grow. Active effort is actually required to enforce this separation, otherwise corruption of one by the other is inevitable. There are plenty of examples in history of this.

Danster: Issue government-sanctioned religious propaganda?
CS: When? Example?
There's plenty. Off the top of my head: Public pro-abstinence statements, arguing against contraception. Support, funding and promotion of "faith-based initiatives", etc, etc, etc.

... And finally, pushing through legislation that is designed to remove traditional liberties under the guise of terrorism countermeasures is directly designed to strengthen the position and power of the government. This has nothing to do with Christianity per se, but everything to do with strengthening the regime's power base. To reiterate, I am not attacking Christianity here, but rather the unwarranted expansion of the legislative powers of the Christian fundamentalist camp.