""Freedom requires religion just as religion requires freedom" - do you think this is true? What does it mean?"

guybee, your conclusions in comment three are based on false logic.
You said, "Freedom does require religion. How else will people be kind, tolerant, compassionate, caring and willing to work for the common good." This is based on the false assumption that these traits cannot be taught outside of a religious context.

You said, "If you look at the history books, all you have to do is remember the communist countries that outlawed religion to see there was no freedom." This is a false presumption. Just because communist countries outlawed religion and were repressive, does not mean that ANY country that "outlawed" religion would be repressive. There are plenty of examples of repressive countries where religion is not outlawed.

You said, "Show me one civilization that survived without religion." This is a self-serving request because the fact is that "religion" has been around as long as humanity. Plus, the fact is that the vast majority of the civilizations that have fallen on the trash-heap of history HAD a religion (or several).

As for your definition of a cult (in #4), you must have a different dictionary that I do. I'm not well versed enough in Mormonism to comment on it directly, but the definition you cite seems to me more a question of theology - you think Jesus was this, they think Jesus was that. The fact is that you have no more evidence for your opinion than they do. And that's perfectly fine - it's what faith is all about. But it hardly constitutes the definition of "cult".

As for #5, I think you miss the point. The laws that society "imposes" on me are rules I have agreed to as a member of that society. I may have voted on several of them, or had a hand in crafting them. I know the full facts of their origin, and purpose, and I can act within the system to change them if I want. This is part of the definition of freedom. On the other hand, the laws imposed on me by a religion (any religion), don't share any of these characteristics. Well, that's not totally true - I can choose not to follow those rules and seek out another religion. But those rules have some mysterious otherworldly origin that I was not involved in, had no say in, and really can't know for sure what the source it (again this is where faith comes in). I also cannot change them. Now I still have the freedom to choose another faith, but if I've been raised as a child to believe that doing so will provoke the anger of an almighty being who will cast me into a pit to endure eternal suffering for making that choice, do I really have a choice? I totally agree with you that true freedom requires laws, it's the nature of those laws that we disagree on.

As for #6, I wish people would stop this propaganda that the U.S. was formed as a Christian nation. It's so patently untrue that I get tired of addressing it. It is absolutely true that many of the Founding Fathers were devout Christians. It's also true that a significant number of their leaders weren't. They were Deists. It would be more correct to say that the Founders thought the nation needed G-d's blessing to succeed. If it had been founded as a Christian nation, the Bible would have been the law of the land, and Christianity would have been established as the state religion.

And perhaps you can answer a Garden of Eden question for me, since you mentioned it. Where in the OT does it say that the serpent was Satan? I've got a KJV Bible, and it's not mentioned anywhere. And how did the serpent twist the truth? It said, "Ye shall not surely die, For G-d doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil." Genesis 3:4-5. Isn't that exactly what happened. They didn't die. G-d did know that they ate thereof. They did acquire the knowledge of good and evil. How was the truth twisted? Didn't they just choose to disobey G-d's command like a child disobeying a parent?

Please don't take all this the wrong way. Except for that last part, I do not mean this to be an indictment of Christianity. I am only attempting to point out that your statements are based on your faith and opinions. There's nothing wrong with that, but those two things don't make them absolute truths. And, as for the last part, I have been asking those questions for over 20 years and haven't gotten a satisfactory answer yet. Lots of dogma, but no answer. Overall I agree that religion gets twisted and lied about by unscrupulous people. But it's the very fact that we can't rely on everyone to live the way Jesus directed that makes it dangerous. Religion (not just Christianity) has been a big a cause of war throughout history as anything else (maybe moreso). Does that make it bad? Certainly not. But is does point out that it's as big an obstacle to freedom as it may be a facilitator.