re: There is no freedom of religion unless there's freedom from it

He didn't say there should be a state religion.

Answer the question he posed Rex.

quote:

---

“Our [the Supreme Court’s] latest take on the subject, which is quite different from previous takes, is that the state must be neutral, not only between religions, but between religion and nonreligion,” Scalia said on Wednesday, according to The Washington Times. “That’s just a lie. Where do you get the notion that this is all unconstitutional? You can only believe that if you believe in a morphing Constitution.”

If Americans want a more secular political system that guarantees those distinctions, they can “enact that by statute,” Scalia said, “but to say that’s what the Constitution requires is utterly absurd.”

---

He is exactly right. If we want a more secular political system we can pass an amendment. A logical thing to do and central to his premise the Constitution is not a living document and I am glad it is not.

What is wrong with his position in your opinion Rex?