Does freedom of religion also mean freedom from religion?

Question

I recall once reading an article in the paper about the debate over prayer in school. In the article a teacher who was for prayer in school was quoted as saying "It says freedom of religion, not freedom from it." As to suggest that we do not have the right to be secular.

Answer 1

Freedom of religion means to be free to believe as you want, which also means you have the right NOT to believe at all.

Freedom FROM religion is often taken as meaning that religion is completely, utterly removed from everything in America.

So, really, it doesn't, not in that sense. People have every right to believe(or not believe) as they choose and they have every right not to be bombarded with one religion or another from their own government. However, it doesn't mean that all religion has to be stripped away. Certainly not from people's homes, or getting rid of all churches or anything like that.

Nobody can take away a person's right to believe as they choose, although, there are places in government where it seems that religion is given a bit of a nod where it shouldn't be, which should be fixed. Government should be neutral and if it were to favor one religion or another, then it could lead to a theocracy, which would threaten EVERYBODY'S right to believe.

Then it would be Freedom FOR Religion only and I don't think any of us want that.

People who say "freedom of religion, not from religion" are usually those who are threatened by the First Amendment(at least for anyone but themselves and those that share their beliefs) and feel that any ruling that "removes" religion from the government(as in the debate of prayer in public school, as public schools are governmentally run, unlike private schools, which, well, are self explanatory) is an "attempt" to remove any and all religious references from government, which they may feel might lead to the removal of religion altogether.

And that's not what the First Amendment or any of those rulings are really about. In the case of school prayer, just because it's forbidden(and has been as of 1963) for teachers to lead children in the Lord's Prayer before class, doesn't mean a child can't pray to God(or any other deity or deities) by themselves before a meal or test. Some people would like to force everyone to pray a certain way and what the government is trying to do(and because it's run by people, it's fallible, so there are mistakes, but luckily, it's a self-correcting system so, sooner or later, it gets fixed, or so we hope) is stay neutral, to allow individuals to pray, but not play favorites with one religion or another.

It's usually people who want everyone to believe the same who are threatened by this and make this sort of comment, although to a degree, it's true. Just because we have the right to believe as we choose, doesn't mean that we should do away with religion altogether. We just need to remove religion of any kind from government, but leave things like personal beliefs alone.

So...I suppose it doesn't mean freedom from religion as in freedom to remove EVERYTHING religious from America, which is downright silly and impossible anyways. It just means the freedom to believe without having another religion imposed on you. Some people are just threatened by the idea that they're not the only ones in the world and can't get their way, which, in this case, appears to be forcing every child they teach(whether they're Christian or not) to pray in school.

Answer 2

Hmmm... I like that quote actually. I don't think it suggests the lack of a right to be secular at all. I see it as stating that freedom of means all inclusive, and freedom from means banning. One student can say a prayer and another can choose not to. It means that Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Mormons, New Agers.... can all have "clubs" at the school. I believe that where the quote is coming from is that the secular world is becoming the new state religion, which is what the constitution clearly prohibits. By banning Christian things from the school, it is taking away Christian's freedom of religion and promoting the secular set of beliefs. True freedom is all inclusive. Everyone should be able to have their religious beliefs. Not be free from encountering other beliefs.

Answer 3

Freedom of religion includes the right to be "secular" (not to hold a religious position publicly, i suppose you mean), un-religious, agnostic or atheist. At least that's how most people understand it and how it would be interpreted in relation to European and UN human rights laws. It's only logical, since having a religion is a set of metaphysical views and lifestyle choices... as is atheism or un-religiousness. That teacher was twisting the sense of the words for other ends. Freedom of religion allows you to hold any position on the religious spectrum from atheist to Buddhist to Christian to Satanist.

Answer 4

Freedom of religion means the (ADULT) right to choose and practice any form of religious belief. In practice "freedom of choice" is dictated by the educating authorities/ state and would mean the indoctrination of the young and immature with the "right" system. Did your school put it to the vote? Did they offer Hinduism/ Buddhism/ Secularism? Of course not! You get the "truth" according to your school/state/country. Freedom to do what THEY believe!

Answer 5

When the Pilgrims came over it was because England forced all citizens to join the Church of England(Episcopal).These guys were Bible believing Protestants and wanted to worship as they pleased.That has come down to freedom of religion.No one(except in some 'hick'areas ) have been stopped from practicing their faith.Until the 60s,Secularists are trying ,sucessfully to take that right away.
There's nothing in the Bill of Rights or The Constitution that says there should be "Separation of Church and State".That comes from an opinion by T.Jefferson.
You can have freedom from religion but we also need freedom for religion.Do Your Thing!

Answer 6

Well, some people claim secular humanism is a religion.

The government is not allowed to force religion on anyone, because then it would be forcing a particular religion, so yes it means freedom from.

Answer 7

Everson Vs. Board my good man, we do have freedom from religion.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=330&invol=1

"The 'establishment of religion' clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. Neither can force nor influence a person to go to or to remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion. No person can be punished for entertaining or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attendance or non-attendance."

Answer 8

I'll try to stop laughing long enough to write this... "we do not have the right to be secular" just slays me. We have taken prayer out of school, Christmas is been turned into a winter holiday, evolution is taught as fact, Haloween seems to be no problem being in schools and you worry about not having the right to be secular. We teach "alternate lifestyles" as normal and study any religion except Christianity and Judism...remember the Mythology classes? Please refrain from pissing me off with dumb questions like this in the future.

Answer 9

Yes, it ought to mean freedom from religion for those who desire it, since being non-religious is, paradoxically, a form of religious belief. A nonspecific "moment of silence" at the start of the day might be acceptable, since one doesn't have to do anything spiritual with it if one doesn't want to, but no more.

Answer 10

Considering that religion is the antithesis of freedom, " religious freedom" is pretty much a nonsense term