You miss the point. As you say there is nothing in the constitution that prohibits the president from asking this. Nor is there anything in there forcing us to support him if he does. Those who support such a request are free to follow it and to vote for people who also support that action. Those of us who oppose it are free to say so and to vote against him and others who support that.
The above group is; ". . . working to protect the constitutional separation of church and state since 1978. " There is no such constitutional separation. Nor is there anything in the constitution prohibiting people from pointing that out.
The constitution gives the president the right to ask us to pray. He is a citizen and has a right to freedom of speech just like you do. We are free to pray or not pray as we see fit.
The constitution does not give him the right to demand we pray. Nor does it give you the right to forbid him to ask.
Many people on all sides of many arguments miss the beauty of our constitution. It protects the great and the small. It also protects the popular and the unpopular.
It is obvious why unpopular speech needs protection. We forget that popular speech also needs protection. We accept P.C. bs.
We are forbidden to call people Negro, Indians, cripples, handicapped, etc. There is nothing wrong with any of these terms. Non are derogatory. They became unusable because some small segment of each group needed something to complain about and something to attack for personal gain.
The above group is doing the same thing. They are looking for victim status for personal gain.
President Bush's request that people pray harms no one. Only people who are looking for a way to become a victim would think that it does.
That may be right but those who originally had the intention to pray are doing so nonetheless and those who don't believe in prayer (or don't pray for other reasons) are not going to pray just because the president (or some other autority) says so.