I'm late to this thread. I hope you'll forgive my butting in. I'd like to note my take on this, in case it is useful.
The religious are free to believe whatever nonsense they please. I suppose we all agree on this.
Different religions subscribe to different collections of nonsense, often mutually incompatible, and some people subscribe to no religion at all. Therefore any demand for respect by any religion is tantamount to demanding that many other people subscribe to a lie.
The upshot I see is that no-one has any duty of respect or anything else to any religion of which they are not a member. The tenets, customs and taboos of a religion apply only to its members; non-muslims can make pictures of Mohammed, non-catholics need not revere wafers.
This brings us to public discourse, as, for example, in the formulation of laws. Public discourse needs a common ground, so religious notions do not qualify. If someone happens to be interested in a topic for religious reasons, that is fine, but their pronouncements need to be based on evidence and reason, which do form common grounds for discussion.
If a catholic ridicules a wafer, the catholic church can of course object. If a non-catholic does so, the church should have no recourse unless they can field arguments based on evidence and reason.
™ Version 4.2
