But they wouldn't consider me an "objetivist" unless I "conformed" to their atheistic beliefs. They would respect my rights, but they would exclude as being somehow non-objective because I didn't agree with them.
The question is, are religious people willing to extend that kind of freedom to all others? Everyone would enjoy freedom of religion under an Objectivist system.
Well, it bears noting that the most religious freedoms have occured in the US, in a system that was set up by a populace that was predominately Christian. While other systems such as those like the Soviets and China that embraced atheism, have suppressed religious freedom. So while objectivists would like to imagine themselves as being the ultimate in religious liberty, in practice it is the Christians who receive good marks.
Now granted, religious freedom in the U.S. is not truly complete, nor should it be. Because there becomes a point where religious freedom and the rights of others collide. Abortion to some is rooted in religion, but there are the rights of the unborn child to consider. Pornography in public places harms children, women and men, but the moral underpinnings are religious in nature because the whole construct of family is religious in nature. We aren't fish who spawn and leave our children to fend for themselves, though there are fishy characters out there.
No, just wrong. You don’t have to believe me. Ask another one.
At least you understand, everyone who disagrees with you, is not your enemy, and that reasonable people can disagree and remain benevolent toward one another.
But they wouldn't consider me an "objetivist" unless I "conformed" to their atheistic beliefs.
That depends on which "Objectivists" you are talking about. Here is a link to "Christian Objectivists."
Hank