you have a right to worship your god, you dont have a right to go to church or other religious institution
I didn't say anything about "institutions". No reason to drag them in to the discussion.
My point relates purely to the "free exercise" clause of the 1A, which we commonly refer to as "freedom of religion", and is essentially the
right to freely exercise religion.
Another way to look at the matter is to say that we are at
liberty to freely exercise religion.
I recomended to X Factor back in post #47 in this thread, and I'll repeat the recomendation here, that you look into the difference between a "liberty" right as opposed to a "claim" right.
A liberty right consists of the freedom to simply do or have a certain thing, a claim right consists of an obligation on others to allow or enable or ultimately provide a certain thing.
You're taking a monocular view of this topic and looking at everything as either being a claim right or not being a right at all.
I don't think that view is accurate.
The simple fact that others aren't obligated to provide you with something doesn't mean that you don't have a right (aren't at liberty) to have it.
I agree with you that nobody is required to provide me with a job (I have no rightful "claim" to a job), but that doesn't mean that I don't have a right (am not at liberty) to have a job.
If you don't want to give me a job, and the government doesn't want to give me a job, I have the right to look elsewhere, or to obtain new skills/education which make me employable, or to open my own business, with the end being to obtain a job.
how does someone provide you with words to speak?
Well obviously they can't.
But they don't need to because we're not talking about the kind of right that obliges others to provide me with anything.
Until a law is passed that says I can't speak freely I have the right to speak freely.
Until a law is passed that says I can't have a job I have the right to a job.