Atheism, necessarily a RELIGION under 1st amendment

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." This is the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Its equivalent in the 1987 Philippine Constitution is Sections 4 and 5 of Article III (Bill of Rights).

"Section 4. No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances."

"Section 5. No law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination or preference, shall forever be allowed. No religious test shall be required for the exercise of civil or political rights."
It has been argued that atheism is not a religion. This makes sense because "off" cannot be considered a TV channel and "nude" cannot be considered a type of clothing.

However, for purposes of protection under the first amendment, "atheism" has to be considered a religion. Without this legal fiction, an atheist may be compelled by government action to, for example, swear to God or declare the existence of a god or gods.

The leading US case of Torcaso v. Watkins teaches us that the "establishment of religion" clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. Neither can force nor influence a person to go to or to remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion."

Of course, it must be remembered that only to this extent can atheism be considered a religion.