President Obama backing off on "freedom of religion"?
by SouthernFriedInfidel | Published on July 19th, 2010, 10:35 am | Religion
Apparently, some religious observers are listening closely to speeches made by the President and by Secretary of State Clinton. And they are feeling troubled that when the subject is religion, the terms these two use have changed. Where they used to tout America's "freedom of religion," they have apparently dropped that in favor of "freedom of worship."It's a fine distinction, one that worries several groups. Stepping back from freedom of religion, so fear, means that the freedoms they are used to in leading their religious lives OUTSIDE of worship (like wearing traditional garb, eating religiously-approved foods and such-like) may be endangered.
Of course, it would also mean that the government may push back when fundies try to insist that science classes have lessons that include the Flintstones or similar pathetic nonsense. And of course, "honor killings" and the use of Sharia Law would be out of the question... so I wouldn't be too upset over that.
But is "freedom of worship" the correct term to use for a more secular world? SHOULD the government get involved in non-worship religious activities? Would "freedom of worship" include protection of non-worship?
Thoughts?