Already there, bro.
You and I could call ANYTHING a "religion." Even an entity called the 'Church of anti-Churches.'
The definition of "religion" has been subverted and hijacked -- as has common sense.
"As an alternative, why not simply allow people to worship as they choose, or not, so long as they do no harm to the rights of another person? They can establish churches and whatnot as they will, subject as always to fraud laws and tax laws as appropriate."
Again, we're covering the same ground. Problem: Who is the arbiter of the conditions "harm" and "fraud"? Both concepts are relative, aren't they?
That's the problem with relativism and it's mantra of "tolerance" -- there is NO definitive "truth."
Without absolute values, anarchy and chaos can only prevail. AND hide behind the protective guise of "religion."
Nope. If you use force or fraud to deprive another citizen of their rights to life, liberty, or property that constitutes harm. Such activity is properly prosecuted.
The simple existance of, say, the Eternal Church Of The Worship Of Naked Molerat does no harm to anyone. It is only when some individuals do harm that it becomes a problem, but even then that is solved by their imprisonment.
Besides, attacking every other religion save your own merely creates the impression that yours is threatened by them.