The Godless left just redefined establishment to mean endorsement in order to make their "living constitution" evolve into whatever they want it to mean at any given time. Today few even knows what an establishment of religion originally meant.
“The language you cite was debated and rejected, but even it does not make clear that any preferential treatment is establishment. It only forbids establishment of a denomination in preference to another, it doesn’t mention endorsement. “
Not true. Here’s the definition of endorsement:
1. the act or an instance of endorsing
2. something that endorses, such as a signature or qualifying comment
3. approval or support
I think you’re confusing political endorsement with legal endorsement. When Congress endorses a religion, it’s approving of its use for Congress as well as the United Staets as it represents the legislative body of the U.S., which is a clear violation of Amendment I.
One may argue that just because the government doesn’t pass any laws with regards to religion, it’s not a violation of the Constitution. But this has been clarified by SCOTUS as “defacto legislature” many times in the past. The simple common practice and continuance thereof is considered to be de facto legislature by Congress. One example of this is de facto War. Even if Congress doesn’t declare war, it declares “de facto” war whenever it continues to fund armed conflicts.