Louis XIV was the vision of the tyrant they sought to stop, and his focus was to murder people, almost all of whom were Protestants, who did not agree with his religious views - kind of like Osama Bin Laden if you think about it. Louis tried to fit everyone within the confines of his one state, one king and one religion.
Now, does that give me a "religious view" of the Constituion, or a recognition that the Constitution recognizes three integral rights in order to allow folks to have a "religious view" or to not have one at all? Most importantly, the US Constitution allows me or anyone else to be a Protestant of any type I wish - which currently is a right that does not exist yet in France, or Italy, or Germany, or just about anywhere else in Europe.
Frankly, I don't think it does create a situation where I am viewing the Constitution through a religious filter, and whether I do or do not have or not have a religious point of view is none of your business, nor is it the business of the state. Let me go further, the Constitution provides that I have a fundamental right to protect my right to have that point of view, whatever it might be, even against armed troops in the US Army that might be sent to live in my house. I have that right against the state and I have that right through the Second against individuals who might seek to coerce me.
Now, what was it you wanted to say? Bet you wanted to talk about the First Amendment alone - that's the one that says the government stays out of religion. It says the New York Times can print lies. It says the Washington Post can subvert public order and decency.