Depends upon whom you get to decide what is and is not a "religion". They you'll REALLY see stupidity.
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. The government, other than taking care to enforce the laws regarding fraud and murder (among others), does not elevate ANY religion over any other in preference or law, and simply stays away from it altogether.
Oh, wait...that's how it's SUPPOSED to be anyway!
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."
WOW!!!
There is a concept. Let's stay out of peoples lives and hope they do the same for us.
I wonder where I can find a place like that?