Very.
Take a look at governments that promote religion. Theocracies don't do well. They tend to trample human rights.
BTW, this includes freedom FROM religion. Government shouldn't push religion down our throats.
2007-01-05 23:41:20
·
answer #1
·
answered by nondescript 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
It depends on the importance you give religion. If a religion is the main driving force in your life, freedom of religion is very important. But if not, it does not matter.
What's furthermore important is the respect towards other people's religion(s). There's where in my opinion things go wrong, people claim freedom for their religion but at the same time they don't respect and accept other religions. Hence all the (religious) wars on this planet...... too sad.
2007-01-05 23:46:01
·
answer #2
·
answered by firstlady6969 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
It is very important, right up there with free speech. As Yahoo Answers show people have many different ideas and questions about religion and spirituality, so with freedom of religion people are free to explore what's out there and what works for them.
Without this freedom you can still discover things however it is much harder.
2007-01-05 23:50:38
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
As important as freedom from religion.
2007-01-05 23:41:47
·
answer #4
·
answered by Neo Tarantula 2
·
2⤊
0⤋
Almost as important as the freedom from religion .
People should make up their one minds.
2007-01-05 23:42:07
·
answer #5
·
answered by JuventAus 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Very important!
As an Indian, I feel that freedom of religion is one of the most striking feature of our Constitution.
India is a land of diverse faiths. We have Hindus, Buddhists, Moslems, Christians, atheists, and anything that you can even think of. Thus, the importance of 'religious freedom' can be felt in India from the cradle to the grave. Articles 25-30 of the Constitution of India deals with religion. It confers overwhelming rights on minorities especially.
Personally, beyond the scope of our Constitution, I feel that one should have the freedom to 'choose' and exercise his/her religious beliefs whether or not it conforms to his/her 'original' (or parental) religion. One should have the right to convert from one religion to another; albeit in a sincere way. No one should be allowed to play politics in this regard as the subject-matter of religion/faith is a very private affair and not a public one.
2007-01-05 23:41:52
·
answer #6
·
answered by The Maulvi Who Sold His Maruti 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
It is no coincidence that the concept of freedom of religion has been most strongly advocated by religious minorities, because they have been on the receiving end of persecution and discrimination from established religions that hold political power.
It is part of a broader problem, that of groups of people who have more power oppressing minority groups. It may be over religion, but also other differences like race, language, ethnicity, political ideology, socio-economic class, caste, gender, etc.
So i think we should step back from the the freedom of religion question and address the bigger issue, and promote the principle of freedom of everyone to be different, and especially protect the rights of minority groups of all kinds, religious or otherwise.
However, i am digressing. On the specific question of freedom of religion (in which i would include freedom not to have a religion), we have only to look at history to see why it is important to value and protect this freedom. And the best way to ensure freedom of religion is to keep religion and politics separate from each other. Whenever they mix, the result is that religion becomes corrupted by the politics of power, and politicians come to see religion as a means of controlling people and therefore force it on people and use it to justify wars and persecution.
All the worst abuses of religion: the inquisition, the crusades, Catholics burning Protestants at the stake, Protestants persecuting Catholics and non-conformists, witch hunts, religious wars, forced conversions... such things have tended to be associated with a lack of religious freedom, and with situations where religion and politics were mixed up in each other's affairs.
Should there be a limit to freedom of religion? There are times when religious practices may come into conflict with the law, or be detremental to the good of society, and there may be times when it is necessary to curb certain religious practices.
For example, what if a megalomaniac sets up his own religious movement in which he abuses children, promotes drug addiction, and maybe encourages people to commit suicide? Or what about female genital mutilation, which is claimed to be for religious reasons by some who believe in it, should such groups have the right to carry it out on their girls? Or what about neo-Nazi religious groups that promote white supremacy and anti-Semitism and promote the idea of a racial war, or Islamic extremists who promote suicide bombing?
2007-01-06 14:38:53
·
answer #7
·
answered by Beng T 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
It is freedom to BE, to DO and to HAVE that is important. This includes freedom to choose and think for oneself.
This covers all things including religion.
True freedom is not just freedom FROM something.
2007-01-06 04:31:25
·
answer #8
·
answered by thetaalways 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
As important as freedom from religion.
Ramen !
2007-01-05 23:42:50
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Gauging a country's freedom of religion is usually a very good way of gauging the country's human-rights strength in general. So it's very important.
.
2007-01-05 23:44:32
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋