User blog comment:Bobalugee1940/Estates-General for the USA/@comment-2236231-20181104234413

The user Lordganon has made some points to consider and I don't think I can contribute anything nearly as well. Though I will add the small fact that when the Republic of South Carolina was declared on the 26th of March, 1776 the Angelican Church was in it's constitution the State Religion. The first president was John Rutledge.

The General Assembly motioned for a new consitution which John vetoed believing such would make the state too much of a direct democracy which he felt was ill suited for handling the present state of war with the Empire. In response the General Assembly dismissed him as President and elected Rawlins Lowndes to replace him.

Rawlins disenfranchised the Angelican Church, adopted many of the General Assemblies motions, and changed his title from President to Governor while hoping to have South Carolina declared neutral in the war and wait until it blew over so as to be re-admitted into the Empire as the new consitution stated that the state was a temporary meassure "until an accommodation of the unhappy differences between Great Britain and American can be obtained."

South Carolina began to loose the war and the General Assembly, realizing that a more Direct Democracy was not suited for the present state of war welcomed Rutldege back as governor after dismissing Rawlins.

I only bring this up as states did have state religions but allowed fellow christians to practice without persecution so I disagree with the notion that some portion of the population wouldn't approve such a religious system- I however due to the fact that Rawlin's act was not undone- believe such portion too small for their not to be a resistance- a social movement to disenfranchise the church and distance it from the state- such poriton would be far larger then those who would think otherwise with those thinking otherwise being typically Loyalist who had no issue with the Angelican Church.