Religion and the law

[robvalue]

Let's assume we're in a secular country (in theory or in practice). Feel free to comment on how answers would vary across different countries. We have interactions between religion and the law, and I'm concerned here about how this works on a personal level.

1) Informally, what constitutes a religious belief? How is it any different from a regular belief? What elements must it have, other than calling it a religious belief?

2) Legally, what constitutes a religious belief?

It tends to be easier to identify common traits among paradigm cases than to establish it from a definitional or a priori standpoint.  To that end, most definitions of religion with respect to law tend to be circular.  Religion is what the religious do.  The religious are religious because they follow a religion.  And around and around it goes.  Frameworks like Ninian Smart's seven dimensions of religion are helpful, but ultimately that too is simply reasoning from paradigm cases.  As Ed Meese remarked of pornography, the standard appears to be, "I'll know it when I see it."

That's how I see it as well, which is why I find it so confusing. I suppose I could put it the other way: what would not be allowed to be a religious belief under the law? I can call literally any belief I have my religious belief, and it seems it would be maximally beneficial for me to do so. I choose not to call any of my beliefs religious, because to me it sounds like erecting a barrier, as I've mentioned before. I want my beliefs to all be publically open to scrutiny.

Last I heard, in the USA they do in fact decide what counts as a religion and what doesn't for tax purposes, based on number of adherents and some other factors. That's bulllshit as far as I'm concerned.