Okay this thread was a messy train wreck from the start, so it was never really going to get better, and J-man will probably not even read this, but the reason that gays feel they have to hide who they are is because they are beaten as children (gays are beaten more relentlessly than non gays, I do not remember by how much, something like 20%+ was what I think was cited before), bullied at home by parents, bullied in churches by other adults, and bullied by public messages at large and the belligerent use of homosexuality as an insulting state of existence. I do not even know what fucking point you thought you had about gays not having a right to be open, what do you want to do, take away free speech if it involves making homophobes uncomfortable? Accommodating the right to make people uncomfortable by telling them that they are going to hell is not the same as making people uncomfortable by being gay and being proud of it, especially when most of the reason people need to be something ridiculous like "proud" of being gay is because people people, like say those in the former group, relentlessly try to repress the other group. Being obnoxious about how gay one is could be the same, but just being gay and trying to make people aware of the problems is not the same as the relentless promotion of religion for your souls/money. Gay people do not want your souls or money, they just want to be allowed to be gay + not be relentlessly harassed like they have been until now (and will be for at least a long while longer!) + probably not to really be around you if you have a problem with anything mentioned previously.
As to actual religious rights, religious rights should be those that are legal and do not bother people in an unwarranted manner. At the University of Texas, every single loud, public, annoying as shit pander I saw was religious. We have a main street where most of the classes are (all the math, most of the business, most of the base level general classes), and about 10,000 students are on it between each class period. For religious panders, they would often allow them to block off the middle of this street and make people late for class while we were annoyed by the general affair. While that may not be so bad, the biggest offender to me was when they put up a gigantic monument decrying abortion, including saying that it was a sin and you would go to hell if you aborted, and no I am not exaggerating this shit or distorting this shit. They also had students with loud speakers (whatever you call them, not microphones but the other thing) shouting at us. Daily we also had religious zealots shouting at us around campus in general (not sure if this was tacitly allowed or not, or just random zealots). There were masturbatory school sponsored "debates" that always just turned into Chrirstians shouting at Muslims and Muslims shouting at Christians (by far the most common result...really not a good one), but alternately Jews shouting at Christians, Muslims shouting at Jews, and all sorts of fun! They just did this outside where we ate food at most commonly...yup. Anyway, any protection or sponsorship of this shit was ridiculous, especially for something like the abortion monument, and the only reason it was allowed was because religious ideas get special protectionism. Sure they could do something similar for the environment or something, but this all routinely happened for religious purposes, not other purposes, at least a couple times a year something as absurd as the monument thing happened.
As to Deck Knight's ridiculous moralistic screed that I only saw the beginning of because I am forced to have him off ignore since you cannot ignore moderators, it takes a lot more ego and sinful arrogance to decry the morals of everyone not adhering to the arbitrary writings of 40+ men in a codex that books were put into and taken out of at random than to respect the morals of people who do not have some holy book. The reason our morals might slightly change is because it takes a lot of effort to decide and get them right, although like I just explained surely you should understand this, since Christians had to deal with matters like if gnosticism was okay, the varying takes on when Jesus was coming back, and various other fun debates that resulted in a shiftless, varying morality that was settled rather at random! Religious ideas and morals are elevated not because they are better or make more sense but because they have been adhered to and people cling to what they have adhered to, since change is scary, people living freely is scary, and whatever other silly reasons people cling to traditions far after they have plainly become farcical. I do not know about other schools, but in Texas elementary schools, religious ideas are relentlessly promoted. Of course people will end up regarding the morals more highly in the end when you inculcate them as children and hit them at school, home, and church. That does not make them more valuable or sensible, it only means that people are clinging to them harder.
A good paraphrase would be that the idea that only religion can provide morals is an alternative to a hell as an all damning reason that religion is utterly necessary. Unfortunately, it is a much more human, much more vain idea than the general idea of a scary afterlife (which is just silly idea more than malicious, it is a genuine fear anyone could invent for her or himself). Actually, the idea that only religious ideas can be correct is a microcosm of religion with a slightly different message...it is just a ridiculous notion.
Finally, to the insane derailing into what atheism is or is not, I do not see how it could possibly be seen as a religion.
1. a. Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.
b. A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.
2. The life or condition of a person in a religious order.
3. A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.
4. A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.
Idiom: get religion Informal 1. To become religious or devout.
2. To resolve to end one's immoral behavior.
I realize that not everyone is the same, but the essence of what I try to get at in the following is that it does not have to be about a fixation with religion, which in the end essentially makes it the same as a religion to religious people (for some reason, why should it matter). If anything, for people like me at least, it is about not being a fixation. I moved on from religion completely, other than enjoying philosophy at large and it entering some of my readings. I only deal with it when others bring it up, I am comfortable with my complete lack of "spirituality". Then again, I am not sure any of this should even matter, why should it be a religion even if atheists were too fixated on other religions/the idea of god? It is just simply completely not religious...but even if you cannot accept that, I think I am providing some pretty no brainer reasons for why rejection does not have to be religious itself or a fixation.
1a. I do not remotely give a shit about gods or how the universe was created. It makes a lot more sense for some crazy scienctific shit to have happened no matter how it means "something had to be there" since a god cannot just spring out of nothing either!
1b. I do not have an institutionalized system of beliefs, and my atheistic beliefs only involve rejecting the idea of gods existing or that I should fucking remotely care. It is not even so much a rejection as "this makes no sense, please leave me alone, no one should care, seriously stop talking about it already". Christians have this obsession with how atheists must be obsessed with them back (and, unfortunately, a lot of atheists do not really help the case).
2. There is no religious order.
3. There is no spiritual leader.
4. There is no cause, although there could be principles formed from a rejection of a god as a starting point. I do not have any of these personally (when I dropped the jesus gods from my life, the only change in my morals was to pursue sex eventually, and while that was zealous, it has nothing to do with my rejection of god, I just really like women and every part of their bodies!), but I think any principles formed with/because of atheism would be more philosophical anyway, since they should not be formed with religious influence. A lack of religious influence can be a factor if religion was moved away from, but since it is not a necessary condition, it is not binding to "what an atheist is" in any way.
i.2There is definitely no resolve to end immoral behavior. I do not care about traditional ideas of moral or immoral, but rather sense and freedom. I enjoy life, others should try to enjoy theirs.
(i.1 was irrelevant)
These definitions were taken from thefreedictionary.com, and whatever definition of religion you use, my beliefs are not religious. The beliefs that stem from/cause me to be atheistic are also not antireligious. I am antireligious because I think religion is really fucking stupid, but nothing I said above needs any of that vitriol to be true or ever did, the two matters are separate.
Anyway, this whole post has not been as well linked together as it could be, my apologies for my nearly 4 A.M. writing.