“In the US should be able to choose freely to believe or reject the beliefs of any religion at any time without the threat of death, the withholding of rights, or without being subject to any economic penalty for leaving that religion.”
You already have that right.
To do as you suggest puts a Christian spin on the constitution - and that’s equally as bad.
To put a test on dogma that evaluates whether it calls for the conversion of unbelievers by pain of death or economic hardship in absence of voluntary acceptance slants the US toward Christianity is your first unsubstantiated assertion.
How would it do that?
Let's say your right, and I may be too slow to see why you're right.
The constitution already had a Christian, if not definitely Deist, on it in the first place. How would slanting a country founded by Christians and other Deists back toward Deism somehow worse than allowing the country to accept as normative infanticide, sodomy, and families in which the parentage is by the committee of the “present” or “available”, and not by what has been fundamentally established for the human race by nature itself?
I think the second question is probably more debatable than the first, since the first assertion has little if no basis in the first place.
I, however, will indulge your attempts. I'm all ears.