[P-Marlowe]

I'm sure your one little paragraph does not encompass all the facts of the case.

Those are the ONLY relevant facts upon which the court based it's decision.

Since Congress is prohibited from making laws that promote religion through government institutions, states are also prohibited.

Congress is not so prohibited. It is merely prohibited from making laws respecting an establishment of religion or prohbiting the free exercise thereof.

Also, Engel v. Vitale clearly stated that school prayer is unconstitutional, whether or not students were permitted to opt-out of participation. The case was settled years ago, and I feel no need to argue its points again.

But that is not what the constitution says. It is an eisegesis of the constitutional language. Such an interpretation of the language of the constitution is neither necessary nor reasonable.

[Lunatic Fringe]

Congress is not so prohibited.

Well I think there's your problem right there. So your belief is that Congress IS permitted to promote religion? I think your personal beliefs are getting in the way of clear thinking.

Let's time travel 300 years into the future, and there is an Islamic majority in Congress. Do you still believe Congress is permitted to promote religion? Or just YOUR religion?