If Islam teaches religious freedom, why did the Holy Prophet (sas) have certain idols and places of worship destroyed?

If the Holy Prophet ^sas had wished to impose his will on the disbelievers by breaking idols, he would have done so just one year before he destroyed the idols in Mecca. The Holy Prophet ^sas and his companions performed pilgrimage in Mecca during the seventh year of Hijra.

Meanwhile Quraish, apprised of the approach of the Muslims, according to agreement evacuated the city in a body and, ascending the adjacent hills, watched for the coming of the pilgrims 

(Muhammad: Seal of the Prophets).

The city of Mecca was temporarily under the control of the Holy Prophet ^sas. During this time, there was no earthly force preventing him from breaking the idols. Fear of persecution had never prevented him from openly condemning idolatry, he faced persecution for thirteen years in Mecca. Fear of warfare had never prevented him from condemning idolatry, only two years earlier he had defended himself against a confederate army from all over Arabia. The only thing that could have prevented him was the principle of the Holy Quran:

There is no compulsion in religion.

(Surah al-Baqarah, 2:257).

The Holy Prophet ^sas only had idols broken after the people had voluntarily left idolatry for Islam, not before. There was no enforcement of state authority in breaking idols, it was purely a religious and voluntary decision. For example, if an idolatrous tribe has an idol in their village center today, and that tribe accepts Ahmadiyyat, then acceptance of Ahmadiyyat would require that they destroy their idol. We could never send our missionaries to their village to break their idol against their will, that would go contrary to the principle, “There is no compulsion in religion.” Only after they have rejected idolatry themselves can their idol be broken with their consent. The Holy Prophet ^sas had idols destroyed after the people had rejected idolatry themselves, not before. The breaking of the idols in the Kaaba is an example of this.

Also, the Holy Prophet ^sas had those idols broken that were the collective property of the populace, not idols that were personal property. Again, there was no enforcement of state authority in breaking these idols, it was a religious and voluntary decision. For example, if a Hindu tribe accepted Ahmadiyyat today, then they would themselves convert their temple into a mosque and have it cleared of idols. If a few people in that community remained Hindu, they could not demand that it remain a Hindu temple for their sake. The temple and its idols are the collective property of the community, and the community has a right to decide what to do with its property. We could never send our missionaries to their temple to break their idols against their will, that would go contrary to the principle, “There is no compulsion in religion.” Only after they have rejected idolatry as a community can the idols that are public property be destroyed with their consent. The Holy Prophet ^sas had those idols destroyed that were public property, not personal idols. The breaking of the idols in Ta’if is an example of this.

However, if a place of worship is used as a center for religious warfare and terrorist activities, then it can be destroyed. Whether it is an idolatrous temple or a Muslim mosque does not matter. The destruction of Masjid Zirar by the Holy Prophet ^sas is an example that this principle applies to Muslims and non-Muslims equally. Allah Almighty describes this Masjid saying:

And among the hypocrites are those who have built a mosque in order to injure Islam and help disbelief and cause division among the believers, and to provide a place of hiding for those who have already waged war against Allah and His Messenger.

(Surah at-Taubah, 9:108)

Because this mosque was used as a center for religious warfare and treason, “He ^sas had a command from God that the mosque at Quba’, which the hypocrites had built in order to be able to hold their meetings in secret, should be demolished.” (Life of Muhammad, p. 278).

Such a case is an exception and would not be decided on a religious basis. It would be enforced as a state decision because the crimes committed are crimes against the state. The destruction of Masjid Zirar and Dhul Khulasah are examples of this. These same principles apply to the story of Hadrat Ibrahim ^as breaking idols as well: It may be noted here that the idols belonged to Abraham’s own family. Otherwise it was not right and proper for him to break other people’s idols (Holy Quran English w/ 5 Vol. Commentary, p. 1,701).