[Notwithstanding]

Who in hell do you think you are? I asked a relevent question and you tell me I need to be careful?

--> Your problem is that you think constitutional law is based upon colloquial contemproary English and that precise wording is irrelevant. The question you asked was not quite the one that is legally relevant. The answer to the question you asked is also legally not relevant.

Which religion should my tax dollars go to? I'm sure it will be Christianity, right? What about Islam? What about Jews?

--> There is no Constitutional prohibition from government dollars being spent to further Christian worship or Muslim prayer services. The notion that such spending was prohibited is a novel one that started well over 100 years after ratification. Even now federal dollars spent directly to further a wide array of religious activity aroudn the globe - military chaplains of all faiths are funded and chapels, supplies and other chaplain services are funded directly via tax dollars. Even wiccans now get federal tax dollars for military chaplaincy activity.

Next question. Do the states that levied taxes for religious worship before the civil war still do that? Of course not. Why? Because it was unconstitutional.

--> As noted, its the feds that actually still do so. And to the extent the states fund a national guard unit, they too fund chaplains. Likewsie with legislative chaplains in federal and state legislatures. All of the states prudentially chose to defund most of the other funding programs - they were never ruled unconstitutional.

Revisionist? You're the King of Revisionist history.

--> you are dead wrong and mad at me for pointing that out

Go pound sand.

--> your intellectual argument is just fascinating

[Double Tap]

Mad at you?

You are not worth anger.

I pity you.