Catholics: No communion for Obama supporters

I must disagree with you JD. If freedom of religion is going to apply to everyone it requires a freedom from religion.  You do not truly have the freedom to practice your religious beliefs if you are also required to adhere to any of the religious beliefs or rules of other religions. Simply pointing out that people have the freedom to believe or not believe is not enough. Forcing people to accept some particular idea or adhere to behavioral standards from someone else’s religion means that their religious freedom is being infringed upon. Freedom from religion does not mean, as some mistakenly seem to claim, being free from seeing religion in society. No one has the right not to see churches, religious expression, and other examples of religious belief in our nation — and those who advocate freedom of religion do not claim otherwise. What freedom from religion does mean, however, is the freedom from the rules and dogmas of other people’s religious beliefs so that we can be free to follow the demands of our own conscience, whether they take a religious form or not. Thus, we have both freedom of religion and freedom from religion because they are two sides of the same coin.
 BTW I have read the First Amendment as well as the entire Constitution of the United Sates. You would be hard to find anyone that believes more in the strict application (Jeffersonian) of it's precepts than myself.
 

-pjrnemtp

No what the Constitution grants the people is the right to attend the Church of their choice,any other house of worship, or none at all. Also it stops the government from encouraging any religion over another. It does not say that people cannot bring their personal beliefs into government, even their religious beliefs. This amendment was specifically addressed to the Church of England's official status in some of the colonies (mostly southern ones and the churches in new england who also held a monopoly.)