She has no way of censoring you and it would be up to Jim or his assigns to do something if the rules were broken. What she wished to do matters not since she had no way of doing that. Let her post what she wants, you post what you want, let Jim or the moderators decide if it's correct or not.
That's not where I was going anyway. You claimed that not even the Congress can abridge freedom of religion but She thought she could. Congress is bound by the Constitution, she is not.
She can start a thread here "No Hindus allowed" and she hasn't violated anyone's freedom of religion. Jim or someone will just pull the thread, she has no power here. She can go on Usenet and do the same, depending on the group it may or may not be allowed or ignored, again she hasn't violated anyone's rights. She can post a sign in her house saying that and their she can enforce it, again no voilation. She can even put a sign up in a public place, she still wouldn't violate any single person's freedom of religion but she would probably be breaking a bevy of laws.
So in finish, another person no matter what the case cannot violate your Constitutional rights, only the government can do that, they can break laws which protect those rights but it is incorrect to say this or that person has violated my Constitutional right to free speech or religion. Government includes any federal, state, county, or local governmental agency and persons acting for them.
"Congress can pass no laws abridging the freedom of speech...but Donna can!!!---me."
In other words, you agree with me.