Si modo
Diamond Member
But, Dragon seems to think that the First grants folks the right not to be "exposed" to religion. Sure, it does mean that the GOVERNMENT can't be doing that, but it certainly does NOT mean anyone has the right not to be 'exposed' to religion."Freedom from religion" could mean more than one thing. It could be interpreted to mean, as you say, freedom from being exposed to other people's religions, i.e. the privilege of suppressing religions one disagrees with. But the way the phrase is normally used (generally by Christians objecting to the lack of official Christian expression by the government), it means instead freedom from having someone else's religion imposed on one by the government.
And the First Amendment most definitely DOES guarantee freedom from religion in that sense.
You're an idiot.
"Freedom from being exposed" isn't freedom..it's RESTRICTION, you fucking idiot. If you PREVENT people from openly speaking of/adhering to their religion, you are restricting their religious freedom and freedom of speech.
Fascist piece of shit.
Not "exposed".
Forced into.
As in Freedom from religion.
Nothing in the Constitution forces religion upon it's citizens. Quite the contrary.
You don't have to be religious.
Obviously.