You talk of my "interpretation" of establishment in Islamic countries, but you post nothing to refute or even question it. Feel free, if you can. But those countries have state religion, with a relatively unorganized religion. The fact that this is alien to your experience does not make it any less so.
As far as your remarkable twisting of Madison's words - we certainly do disagree on what constitutes a "religion" since you contend that it means a "church." So, tell me, what level of organized religion do I need to be involved with before my "religious beliefs" rise to the level of "religion." Do I have to have an ordained pastor? Do I have to attend services in a consecrated building? Do I have to subscribe to a set of Biblical interpretations handed down by a central authority?
You need to realize that not all religions resemble your own - and that this does not make them any less "religion".
Of course I did. Your case regarding their "establishment" was that they passed laws inspired by religious beliefs. I countered that the BOR was inspired by a religious belief, and to underscore it asked you why it is, if lack of belief in a Creator is a religious belief, that belief in a Creator isn't a religious belief? You - who's so quick to get on my case if I don't answer your questions pronto - didn't bother to answer that question.
So, tell me, what level of organized religion do I need to be involved with before my "religious beliefs" rise to the level of "religion."
That question is a total non sequitur upon itself. Religious beliefs are not religion, so they're not going to "rise to the level" of religion. Religion, as I've said a number of times, is a mode of worship, and by logical extension whatever apparatus is built around it.