When I see what Indiana has done in regard to

[mrmpa]

religious rights, it gave me pause to think about the Constitution and relligion.

The way I interpret it, is that it is more freedom "from" religion, and less freedom "of" religion. Simply, I as a US citizen have more of a right to not be accosted by your religion, and you have to your religion but it cannot be foisted upon me. That is what this Indiana law is doing it is foisting one's religion upon all.

[elleng]

1. The First Amendment presents the 2 aspects in an interesting, and challenging way:

Amendment I. 'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.'

Enough fodder there for plenty of interpretation, as has occurred through the years. ESTABLISHMENT and FREE EXERCISE.

[stone space]

2. It's both, but this legislation is no more about religious liberty than DOMA was about...

...defending marriage.

[elleng]

3. Right.