Is it moral to compel men to pay for the advancement of a faith they do not support or share?
Or is it immoral?
Yes.
Shall I put in bold for you?
Is it moral to compel individuals to pay for a national defense even if it is counter to their vehemently held convictions about peace?
The "advancement of faith" is a concept of such loose distinctions it can't be appositioned with "compel men to pay". It's an old and tired trick. If a government official prays with his family, he is advancing religion on government time. If a school principle prints a religious slogan, he is advancing religion on government time. But are any of these instances legislating an establishment of religion? No. And that is precisely what the constitution speaks to.
No, it is not moral. I would also include Naturalistic Humanism (Secular Humanism, whatever)in the list of faiths.
-ksen