So in short, rather than propose a way to rectify the problem, you would rather just whine about it, gotcha.
It's that or there is something about your real agenda that would come out in your proposal which you would rather not make public.
Remedies:
1. Interpret the free exercise clause as the dominant clause among the two religion clauses-- not the other way around as is presently done. This is also where Scalia messed up in Smith.
2. Acknowledge that if the 14th amendment application means anything it is that the establishment clause now applies to local establishments of religion.-- which is to say it cannot interfere with local religious organizations.
It is critical to acknowledge that present Supreme Court jurisprudence interprets our religious clauses backwards. The Court tries to avoid "establishments" to the total cost of free exercise. Americans have not meaningful civil rights as they relate to the free exercise of religion. That aspect of the clauses has been reduced to a freedom from religion. That would be the French revolution-- not the American revolution.
No amendments are needed-- just announce that Hugo Black was the anti-catholics fool he was and return to free exercise criteria.