Humm. An interesting question. If you are asking the general question, "should there be freedom to believe in any religion or none without government interference", then the answer would be yes. But we know that our government does promote religion in various ways.
If your question is "does denouncing a particular religion in favor of another in a social setting promote freedom of religion" the answer would probably be no since the Protestant Christian religion has been woven into the fabric of our culture, (in it's more than 900 denominations). Freedom of religion, other than the more accepted Protestant Christian denominations and freedom from religion are still outside the cultural norm.
But we should always stand up for both freedom of Religion, (the belief in Sezmu the God of wine and oil presses if you so choose), and the Freedom from Religion as imposed by government agencies, (Intelligent Design taught in public schools), and that imposed by the cultural majority.

Yes if you defend the right for people to believe as they please without prejudice then that must necessarily include people who choose rationalism, humanism and even atheism.
There is however a difference between freedom of religion and freedom to be religious if that practice comes in to conflict with the law.
We would not for example allow satanist to practice human sacrifice even if they claimed the religious right to do so.
Secular law must take precedence.

I believe that in our constitutional democracy, freedom of religion MUST include freedom from religion.

Religions HAVE had freedoms for as long there have been religions, but NEVER has there a Freedom from Religion right permitted in ANY Society or Culture.

Yes... an ABSOLUTE yes... By standing up for the rights of others, we protect ourselves as well. That doesn't mean stand back while religions try to suppress the rights of others, it means defending the rights of all... the religious and non-religious alike. We're all covered under the same Amendment.

I say no because there’s a very sharp contrast between them.
The freedom of religion primarily states that one religion cannot be the only religion. Which was primarily a protection from the Roman Catholic Church then later on the Church of England.

But don’t forget that these very same religious refugees were also known for persecuting those for whom didn’t practice either the Christian religion or no religion at all.

Which leads us to freedom from religion which is similar to the other but it’s intended to provide protection from religious based communities and workplace’s for those of us who have chosen to not live a life within a religious construct.

So unless the religious accept us completely for our lifestyle choices then supporting them would just be counterproductive.
Hopefully this is helpful or at least more so than the others so far.

Sometimes yes and sometimes no. There are people in this world that will not see the nose on their faces even when they can see their own faces in a mirror.

I stay out of things like that. I will not debate or argue.

I think everybody ought to Mind Their Own Business at all times, unless preventing physical/verbal abuse.