You made an analogy between the federal government paying religious organizations and the federal government paying employees. I pointed out the federal government can (and in fact must) pay employees even if they're Klansmen, but few would approve of the federal government paying the Klan. This was to illustrate the weakness of your reasoning.
I'm terminating this discussion, because you're clearly out of your depth, and you're getting all hot and bothered. But a parting question for you - is Pat Robertson 'mainstream religious'?
And to illustrate the weakness of yours, I pointed out that no judge would ever hold that the Constitution forbids giving money to the Klan, that indeed the people can be trusted to make that call. And again and again, you keep ignoring inconvenient points and hoping desperately that no one will notice. A sure sign of someone who can't keep his head above water in these types of discussions.
To go into even more detail as to why your logic fails, you cited the fact that religious organizations are eligible for funds (for secular purposes) as evidence of some kind of government endorsement of these organizations. But does government endorse the views of the secular organizations that receive federal funds? Of course not. It doesn't care what those views are, just as long as the organization uses the funding to carry out the purposes that are intended for the money.