It may be time for nuance again.
I'm strongly, 100% against government sponsored religion, and that was pretty clearly the constitutional intent -- remember, the founders remembered mandatory taxes supporting the Church of England.
Today, there are 2 imperatives.
1. On one hand, the I wouldn't want the State to endorse or support any particular faith.
2. On the other hand, people of faith deserve the same access and rights of expression as any other citizen.
Many people of faith feel the balance has shifted so far towards "separation" that their own rights of expression have been compromised.
And they're not being paranoid. For example, a few years ago the Supremes heard a case form Virginia, in which the only group refused rental of meeting space at a school was a religious one. Lots of other groups could rent, but the school was afraid of the pro-separation forces....and the result was unfair discrimination against people of faith. They were singled out and denied access simply BECAUSE they were religious. (Supreme court found in their favor, BTW)
So the pendulum has swung strongly towards separation in the last few decades, and only now is a more balanced position coming.
But because of the decades before, dont be surprised that religious folks are a bit salamanderly about the issues.