On a philosophical level, you have a point. However, for me, there are two important considerations.
Datadude is talking about the pseudo-religious "non-religion" that Atheistic Marxism drives in order to destroy and undermine religion. It's good that you clarify your concept of "freedom from religion", but it needs to be recognized is that there are forces and people out there who will use certain sophistry and presented arguments with a duplicitous agenda; they are not being honest.
Regardless of what they say, their purpose is to destroy religion and religious thought and practice.
But really, what you define as "freedom from religion" is actually "freedom of religion". State-controlled religion is NOT "freedom of religion". Freedom of religion in the United States constitutional context means "government is NOT free to make laws that shape and determine what religious practice is and isn't".
When you say "freedom from religion" you really mean "freedom from religious oppression" don't you?
As is clear from a study of history, despite their many flaws, most of the long-lasting religions have consistency provide significant benefits to the populations that practice them. Religions that upheld certain values declined and were pushed out (i.e. child sacrifice, human sacrifice, etc) and others that upheld certain values prospered and delivered benefits. Many of those benefits you yourself, atheist though you are in terms of your faith, acknowledge. Why? Because they are tangible and real.
Thus, it needs to be recognized that not all religions are "created equal." Some are better than others. Some yield many more benefits than others. And the ones that deliver the greatest benefits are the ones that trend towards enhancing the freedom of individuals and groups to pursue the goals of their religion while upholding the innate rights of others.
It's not a coincidence that the concept of religious freedom evolved in the Christian sphere. Religious freedom is critical to religious practice, because freedom is a core ethic or virtue in Christian teaching.
It's also not a coincidence that the greatest equality of opportunity, value assigned to human life, and other ethical 'miracles' have emerged from the Christian sphere.
In any case, I very much agree with everything you've written except for one simple caveat: that something should not necessarily be tolerated simply because it calls itself 'a religion'. However, if government abstains from attempting to define or control religion, and if the innate (God-given) rights of human beings are upheld (aka people are not forced to practice religion or people are not abused and violated in the name of 'religion') then things would work themselves in rather wonderful way.
On a philosophical level, you have a point. However, for me, there are two important considerations.
Datadude is talking about the pseudo-religious "non-religion" that Atheistic Marxism drives in order to destroy and undermine religion. It's good that you clarify your concept of "freedom from religion", but it needs to be recognized is that there are forces and people out there who will use certain sophistry and presented arguments with a duplicitous agenda; they are not being honest.
Regardless of what they say, their purpose is to destroy religion and religious thought and practice.
But really, what you define as "freedom from religion" is actually "freedom of religion". State-controlled religion is NOT "freedom of religion". Freedom of religion in the United States constitutional context means "government is NOT free to make laws that shape and determine what religious practice is and isn't".
When you say "freedom from religion" you really mean "freedom from religious oppression" don't you?
As is clear from a study of history, despite their many flaws, most of the long-lasting religions have consistency provide significant benefits to the populations that practice them. Religions that upheld certain values declined and were pushed out (i.e. child sacrifice, human sacrifice, etc) and others that upheld certain values prospered and delivered benefits. Many of those benefits you yourself, atheist though you are in terms of your faith, acknowledge. Why? Because they are tangible and real.
Thus, it needs to be recognized that not all religions are "created equal." Some are better than others. Some yield many more benefits than others. And the ones that deliver the greatest benefits are the ones that trend towards enhancing the freedom of individuals and groups to pursue the goals of their religion while upholding the innate rights of others.
It's not a coincidence that the concept of religious freedom evolved in the Christian sphere. Religious freedom is critical to religious practice, because freedom is a core ethic or virtue in Christian teaching.
It's also not a coincidence that the greatest equality of opportunity, value assigned to human life, and other ethical 'miracles' have emerged from the Christian sphere.
In any case, I very much agree with everything you've written except for one simple caveat: that something should not necessarily be tolerated simply because it calls itself 'a religion'. However, if government abstains from attempting to define or control religion, and if the innate (God-given) rights of human beings are upheld (aka people are not forced to practice religion or people are not abused and violated in the name of 'religion') then things would work themselves in rather wonderful way.
Freedom from religious oppression. Yes, that is exactly what I mean.
I've nothing to add.
Wonderful post.