Just a friendly reminder: there is no such thing as religious liberty. Why? Two reasons.
1. There is no such thing as “religion in general” – only particular religions. Thus, freedom for one religion will often come at the expense of another religion.
2. There is no such thing as religious neutrality. It’s impossible to have a bunch of religions competing on neutral turf in a society. There will always be an established and privileged religion, even if it’s implicit rather than explicit. Every society has a god (or God).
Thus, absolute religious freedom is impossible. Should Mormons be able to practice polygamy? Should Muslims be allowed to wage jihad on infidels? Should Satanists be allowed to sacrifice cats? Should worshippers of Molech be allowed to slaughter infants? Should pagans be allowed to use psychedelic drugs or temple prostitutes in their ceremonies? Should LGBTQers be able to do drag queen story hour with kids at the public library, or parade their depravity down Main Street? Should people be able to practice slavery, or perversion, or witchcraft in the name of a religion?
Further: What is the basis of public morality and law in a society? Whatever that basis is, is that society’s god/God.
Further: what kinds of speech are off-limits in a society? Blasphemy laws and hate speech laws reveal the god of a society.
Further: what are a nation’s symbols? Are there statues of Baphomet in public buildings? Pride flags flying over state houses? An empty public square is just as religiously freighted as one with a nativity scene in it. Atheism’s naked public square is just as religious as one filled with Christian imagery.
In a Christian nation, other religions might be tolerated at some level, but many of their practices would be outlawed. Toleration is not the same as freedom.
This kind of ordered liberty – as opposed to disordered liberty – rooted in the Christian faith has characterized the West, including America for much of our history, until gullible believers fell for secularist lies about neutrality.
Today, it’s not uncommon for public Christians (including pastors and magistrates) to speak as if our goal is a nation that has “religious liberty.” We are just happy to have a place at the table. But the goal for Christians is not a neutral or pluralistic nation – we should know better than to fall for the myth of neutrality. The Christian goal (as given to us in the Great Commission) is a discipled nation, a Christian nation, a nation ordered under the lordship of King Jesus.
An addendum in response to a question:
The point is that liberty is not — and cannot be — an absolute. You cannot do anything you want, provided you do it in the name of religion. Or to put it another way, true liberty is ordered liberty. There has to be some kind of moral framework that determines what liberty is, what’s allowed/tolerated, etc. All liberties and rights arise from the religious framework of the society. This is true across the board, e.g., freedom of speech does not give anyone the right to slander or libel, the right to bear arms does not mean convicted criminal get to take weapons with them into jail, etc.
Obviously there can be liberty for a *particular* religion. But it is simply impossible (logically and otherwise) to grant *all* religions equal freedoms. If my religion permits me to steal and your holds to private property, we can’t both be free. If one person’s religion includes public displays of sexual perversion and another person’s religion requires modesty in public, we can’t both be free.
Historically, America is a pretty good illustration of this. At our founding, various forms of Christian faith were allowed, but we did not allow Mormons to practice polygamy when Utah became a state, we did not allow Amerindians to continue to use the drug peyote in their religious ceremonies, etc. Obviously, with the decline of Christian influence in our society, the situation has changed. In some Western nations, the freedom of Christians to practice their religion, e.g., public preaching on what the Bible says about LGBTQ, has been threatened or outlawed. There is no neutrality.
Civil law does not govern or coerce belief. People can think whatever thoughts they want. For example, adultery can be criminalized but lust cannot be. Constantine outlawed pagan sacrifice (which was good) but did not outlaw pagan beliefs (which would have been impossible).
The doctrine of religious liberty itself is a Christian doctrine, not one that arose in some kind of neutral way. And the Christians who developed the doctrine did so largely to provide a framework in which different kinds of Christians belonging to different traditions/denominations but generally sharing the same worldview and moral code could get along and live side by side. But the Christians who developed a doctrine of religious liberty did not envision a society in which Muslims could practice Sharia (much less jihad) right along side Christians, or where cults like Mormonism could practice polygamy, or where pagans could practice blood sacrifices and use psychedelic drugs. In other words, no one envisioned absolute pluralism because they knew it would be impossible.
TPC Pastor's Page 