The First Amendment to the United States Constitution makes it unlawful for the U.S. Congress or any of the states to prohibit the free exercise of religion.
The free exercise of religion means the right to believe and profess whatever religious doctrine one desires. Thus, the First Amendment obviously excludes all governmental regulation of religious beliefs. The government may not compel affirmation of religious belief, punish the expression of religious doctrines it believes to be false, impose special disabilities on the basis of religious views or religious status, or lend its power to one or the other side in controversies over religious authority or dogma.
But the exercise of religion often involves not only belief and profession of belief, but the performance of (or abstention from) physical acts: assembling with others for a worship service; participating in sacramental use of bread and wine; proselytizing; or abstaining from certain foods or certain modes of transportation.
A State would presumably be prohibiting the free exercise of religion if it sought to ban such acts or abstentions only when they are engaged in for religious reasons, or only because of the religious belief that they display. It would be unconstitutional, for example, to ban the creation of statues that are to be used for worship purposes, or to prohibit bowing down before a golden calf.
In Texas, as in all states, the First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides robust protections for the free exercise of religion. This means that individuals in Texas have the right to hold any religious belief they choose and to express those beliefs without fear of government interference. The government cannot force individuals to adhere to a particular religion, nor can it punish them for their religious beliefs or practices. Additionally, the government cannot impose special disabilities or benefits based on religious status or views. In practice, this means that Texans are free to engage in religious activities such as worship services, sacraments, proselytizing, and observing dietary or transportation restrictions based on their faith. Any state action that targets religious practices, either by banning them outright or by imposing restrictions only when the practices are religious in nature, would likely be found unconstitutional. It's important to note that while the free exercise of religion is a fundamental right, it is not absolute. The government may impose certain restrictions if they are neutral and generally applicable, and if they serve a compelling state interest and are the least restrictive means of achieving that interest. However, any law or regulation that specifically targets religious practices would face strict scrutiny in the courts.
