Is it time we revisit the 1st amendment freedom of religion?

No. The 1st Amendment is fine exactly as it is.

It's up to the individual to exercise their critical thinking skills and avoid being taken in by hucksters.

The primary amendment with ease denies the federal government from commencing and enforcing a state faith, or telling folks what religion they'll or may not follow... Which is strictly what was achieved in England for decades. You needed to be a exact faith, and you did not have a choice within the topic. The truth that you can be Christian, or Hindu, or Muslim, or Wiccan within the U.S. Is because of the primary amendment. It has nothing to do with how society views your faith of choice. Incidentally, I have no idea the place you reside, but there isn't any legislation that states you are not able to have religious symbols in public locations. Now *executive* constructions, amenities, and lands are a further subject, given that so many persons are in prefer of the separation of church and state.

The 1st Amendment is 3 rights in one. Just because some people believe it only has to do with their religion does not make them right. Congress also understood the 1st amendment to be a right not to believe, also!

"the Freedom of Religion, Freedom of Speech & the Freedom of the Press shall not be abridged."

(that means it can not be changed under any circumstances.)

What you're asking for is already the case. Legally, the right to freedom of religion stops when it conflicts with other people's rights. Basically, you're allowed to believe whatever you like, but restrictions may be placed on your practices. E.g. human sacrifice would still be illegal.

Sometimes judges don't follow those rules because they sympathize with the religion in question, but that's not a problem that can be addressed with further legislation.

This is someone already done. And pretty much any analysis of the Constitution recognized that when a right harms the rights of others, it may not be a right after all.

So, if your rights are being violated by a religion, that religion (or it's followers, to be more correct) tends to be curtailed to remove the violation.

Being wrong, however, is sufficient.

That's already the case. Religious freedom has always been moderated to protect the freedom of others. A religion that practiced human sacrifice or kidnapping and torture would not be granted free rein.

Freedom of Religion also constitutes Freedom FROM Religion

The entire "Bill of rights" needs to be revisited.

It should be written in a way that everything in it is clear to everyone, saying everything it means, and nothing it doesn't.

The vague Amendments need to be repealed.

Why not? These are the same people who like to put limitations on all the other rights of the constitution. We might as well just get rid of the constitution anyways, since nothing is upheld anymore. A lot of people don't believe in rights anymore and love having the government tell them what to do. They cant think for themselves.

Freedom of speech is all well and dandy.

The problem is when people use the right to freedom of speech to systematically victimise an ethnic group and get away with it.

I strongly suspect that the protection of peoples right to racially abuse others so long as it is only verbal, or defame their character without proof is one of the principle causes of Americas high violence.