The difference between these two is that in the first case there is no justification for the political equality of another religion from a theological point of view. Where as in the latter's case because they are only a corruption, or an example of incompleteness theologically, there is some validity to treating them politically equal.
The above, was your original question - and I answered it more than satisfactorily.
With regards to the equality and protection of other religions under the US Constitution, I am strongly for that, except where those religions might, in there practice, break some other law, or they are clearly immoral, i.e human sacrifice, or child molestation.
Regardsless of that equality, I state again, GWB risks offending his God by his speech,
"I believe there's an almighty god who speaks to different faiths -- and I believe freedom is a gift from that almighty."
If his Almighty God speaks to different faiths, it is only to tell them that Jesus Christ is the only true freedom. To leave that out is to tell half a truth and to confirm muslims in there false religions.
He may be PC, but he risks offending his God. Do you agree or disagree?