Religious Freedom Threatened, Elder Oaks Says.

This is a hot button for me and one the areas I’m firmly conservative.

I think maybe we need a better definition of ‘religious freedom’ however, as the way it seems to be defined modernly is ‘you can believe what you want so long as it’s either a) popularly believed, or else b) you never bring it up or practice it publicly so as to not offend the public.’

If this is an acceptable definition, then I don’t think ‘religious freedom’ is at all threatened. I gather than liberal Christians (including NOMs, etc.) generally define it this way and feel comfortable doing so.

But if it’s defined less narrowly, I think there is cause for concern, maybe even grave concern.

On the other hand, I look into history and across geographical boundaries and find no country nor time that has more religious freedom than we do in the USA today. This worries me too, because it means there simply is no precedent for a less narrow concept of religious freedom.