I highly doubt you could have strung this sort of argument together, because you don't even seem to understand it well enough to respond to it.
You haven't really begun to answer the question. Since you represent yourself as a fan of cold hard logic, you should be familiar with this sort of argument, though. You set out certain principles; I ask you to apply them to a different sort of case to see if you're consistent or if these principles you're espousing are just conveniences you've adopted for the purposes of this argument. Correct me if I'm wrong, if these aren't the sort of things you've said:
* People who choose a self-identification should not be recognized as a civil rights group.
* If a group sets itself apart by a choice, we are under no obligation to extend to them extra rights to protect their choices.
* Things which are not the same are not to be treated the same.
It doesn't suffice here to say that we have decided on freedom of religion, because some groups have been given religious rights above other groups, whereas others in very similar situations haven't. I'm asking you to make decisions, so that we can see if you really believe what you're saying above.
Again, let's consider specific cases. Federal law allows the Native American Church (by name) to use peyote in its rituals. People who use peyote not under the jurisdiction of the NAC have been prosecuted, even when they've claimed religious freedom. So you're left with a conundrum. To be consistent with the principles you seem to set out above, it seems straightforward that you disagree with the ability of the NAC
alone to use peyote. How would you prefer to resolve this? (You could also consider the controversial "eagle feather law.")
Again, what about the kirpan? Baptized Sikhs are allowed to carry weapons into places where, say, Christians are not allowed. Alternatively, what about plural marriage in fundamentalist Mormonism? Or, the Texas Constitution, which to this day states:
Etc., etc. I'm asking you to address the questions which "RELIGIOUS FREEDOM, WHEEEE" doesn't answer. I'm asking you to address the situations in which there are clear inequalities for particular groups who have chosen their religious identities. Should these be taken away? Should they be given across the board?
I sense we've exceeded your attention span.