It is stupid to compare politicla correctness to the rules of a religion

My opponent claims it is stupid to compare the rules of political correctness to the rules of religion. He quoted my claim in his list of the top ten most stupid things said on DDO. [1. http://www.debate.org...] This debate provides him with an opportunity to argue for his proposition that the comparison is "stupid." Pro gave no unusual context for his claim, so the primary definition of "stupid" applies: not intelligent : having or showing a lack of ability to learn and understand things[2. http://www.merriam-webster.com...]In supporting his claim [1] Pro argued that conservative opposition to abortion, recreational drugs, and gay marriage are akin to religious rules as well. That's generally valid, but irrelevant to the proposition at hand. My claim about the quasi-religious nature of political correctness came up in a discussion of the difference between liberals and conservatives. It was rebutting the notion that liberals were all for personal liberty and have no such desires to restrict free choice on matters that impact society.Here is my original forum post which inspired my opponent's claim of stupidity:I think you overlook the extraordinary limitations the left wants to impose on personal freedom. This is embodied in the elaborate rules of political correctness, which match the rules of any religion. A few years ago, the book "The New Thought Police" studied the rules imposed on K-12 textbooks, by a multistate board that certifies texts. About four hundred rules of political correctness were imposed, with 90% of them liberal rules. For example, texts cannot give examples of outstanding Black athletes, never mind what reality exists. Cake cannot be used as a treat, but yogurt is allowed. Women can not be shown in supporting roles.The PC rules are liberal goals to be imposed on society. They'll let people do what they want in the bedroom, but libs believe the kitchen and every other room in the house ought to subject to federal law. You want sugar? That's behavior that cannot be permitted. Or light bulbs or door knobs or plastic bags. Those things affect society less than abortion or gay marriage or drugs, so it isn't a question of what is "personal" versus "public." It's purely about what decisions that ought to be controlled by government.Liberals demand outcomes according to their preconceptions, and that's far more intrusive than allowing free choice. According to libs, it is not acceptable to provide free choice because people may choose wrongly. So if there are "too few" women scientists or engineers, than society must intervene to shape "free" into what they demand.The other relevant point is that it is acceptable for conservatives to favor abortion (Goldwater), gay marriage (Log Cabin Republicans), or wider drug legalization (Buckley) and keep conservative credentials. It's a lot more difficult to Liberals to oppose any of the liberal social agenda. How many people know that Harry Reid wants to roll back Roe v. Wade? He can't talk about it.[3. http://www.debate.org...]In the forum post, reference was made to [4. Bruce, Tammy, "The New Thought Police: Inside the Left's Assault on Free Speech and Free Minds," Three Rivers Press, 2003] Bruce's book is only a convenient example, since it list hundreds of the rules. Pro also argued in his claim of stupidity that the rules of political correctness are not like religion because they are not written down and are not organized. Few of the rules of religion are written down and well organized. Christians cite the Ten Commandments, but Christian sects go on to derive intricate rules that govern everyday life. Does "thou shalt not kill" apply to abortion, capital punishment, war, and self-defense? Believers do not always agree, but they all arrive at rules. Most religions are not nearly so succinct as the Ten Commandments. Shinto has thousands of parables without formal lists of rules. [5. http://en.wikipedia.org...] In general, religious rules govern matters as what believers should eat, how they organize their lives, and many seemingly inconsequential details. Political correctness mirrors that.This is not a troll debate. Pro has the burden to prove that comparing political correctness to is not merely inaccurate or inaccurate in some way, but is stupid. In accepting this debate, both sides agree not to use personal attacks, insults, or obscenity. Arguments relative to the debate must be made within the character limits of the debate.