[fr_freak]

"Freedom OF religion is not freedom FROM religion."

Pretty meaningless statement. For some science is a religion, for some sex is... Look, I am not anti-Christian, but these sorts of meaningless statements hurt the conservative cause.

On the contrary, that statement is far from meaningless. In fact, it goes to the heart of the misinterpretation of the First Amendment that is being propagated from court to court.

The concept of freedom of religion means that citizens are free from being prevented from practicing whichever faith they choose (as in "Congress shall make no law..."). This means that if a public official wishes to say a prayer during a speech, or a child in a public school wishes to say grace before lunch, even out loud, he cannot be forbidden by law to do it.

However, the modern, Leftist, activist, interpretation of this concept is freedom from religion, where any individual can put a stop to any practicing of faith in public simply by saying it offends him. Even the vestiges of religion, such as the posting of the Ten Commandments in the courthouse, can be removed through the force of a single individual's objection, with the compliance of an activist court hostile to Christianity. This turns the concept of freedom OF religion on its head, and has the effect of suppressing religious freedom.

[Avenger]

Thanks fr_freak, I appreciate your comments. I think I may have been misinterpreting the intent of that statement. In light of your explantion I think I am more or less in agreement.