I think get what you’re saying. Freedom from religion should be codified in some manner, and atheism should be afforded the same protections and rights. Right?
Kind of, but not really. Look at France, they have freedom from religion. They’re not allowed to be religious fanatics in public. It’s why they banned the burkini.
I mean, if they ban only Islamic religious symbols but not crosses, bhindis, or yarmulkes then they’re just punching down on a vulnerable and powerless minority. A society is only as good as it treats its most vulnerable, otherwise their culture is “might is right”, which isn’t a culture per se.
No it doesn’t, and that’s the problem.
I think get what you’re saying. Freedom from religion should be codified in some manner, and atheism should be afforded the same protections and rights. Right?
Kind of, but not really. Look at France, they have freedom from religion. They’re not allowed to be religious fanatics in public. It’s why they banned the burkini.
I mean, if they ban only Islamic religious symbols but not crosses, bhindis, or yarmulkes then they’re just punching down on a vulnerable and powerless minority. A society is only as good as it treats its most vulnerable, otherwise their culture is “might is right”, which isn’t a culture per se.
I think you missed the forest through the trees on that one. I agree that you can’t half ass it though.
Oh they very much are. As long as it’s christian.
You’re also missing the forest through the trees.
It does, though.
It only says that CONGRESS shall make no law. The states think they have that power to enforce a religion but the national government does not.
They might think that, but they don’t.
That’s not freedom from religion. That’s freedom from a religious state.
Literally written to protect people from religious persecution in ANY way