You are pre-supposing that there are only two points of view. Your views of god/creation are not your neighbors view. - Thus, the needed separation.
I've always thought our forefathers were more concerned about the Federal Government somehow advocating/establishing/funding a particular denomination of religion than a generic understanding of God and the rights we have from Him by nature.
Again, you seem to base your thought on a preconceived view of a type of 'god'. The founders arguably did not. In fact, I doubt that there is, or ever was, a 'generic understanding' of god. -- Despite the lip service by politicans.
Originally the word liberal meant social conservatives(no govt religion--none) who advocated growth and progress---mostly technological(knowledge being absolute/unchanging)based on law--reality... UNDER GOD---the nature of GOD/man/govt. does not change. These were the Classical liberals...founding fathers-PRINCIPLES---stable/SANE scientific reality/society---industrial progress...moral/social character-values(private/personal) GROWTH(limited NON-intrusive PC Govt/religion---schools)!
Evolution...Atheism-dehumanism---TYRANNY('EXCLUSIVE'-pc/liberal/govt-religion/rhetoric)...
Then came the SPLIT SCHIZOPHRENIA/ZOMBIE/BRAVE-NWO1984 LIBERAL NEO-Soviet Darwin/ACLU America---the post-modern deist redacted age
Yes, I am. Namely, given the fact that the universe exists we are faced with only two possibilities as to its ultimate origin and purpose. Accident or Intelligence. What might you propose as a third point of view?
"Again, you seem to base your thought on a preconceived view of a type of 'god'. The founders arguably did not."
I suppose, if you want to revise their writing so as to omit all references to God, Divne Providence, Creator, etc., you'd have a leg to stand on here. Their references are generic as far as I can tell, and they are many.