Is how to abide by the First Amendment "touchstone" given by the U.S. Supreme Court in Epperson vs. Arkansas 1968...
"Government in our Democracy, state and national, must be neutral in matters of religious theory, doctrine, [393 U.S. 97, 104] and practice. It must not be hostile to any religion or the advocacy of no religion; and it may not aid, foster or promote one religion or religious theory against another or even the militant opposite. The First Amendment mandates government neutrality between religion and religion, and between religion and non-religion."
(1) For atheists and liberals (and certainly others) who continue to argue atheism is not religion, will they continue the charade it is not the militant opposite? If atheism is not "militantly" opposite, why do Atheists bristle at exposure to Theist religion?
Is it really so odd that those who cry most often for tolerance have so little to give themselves? Are they projectors of their own intolerance onto others?
The Court majority's actions make a mockery of it's own words.
Take your choice: (1) Atheism is the militant opposite of religion, or (2) atheism is religion; either way the Supreme Court has plainly been issuing opinions that favor the establishment of atheism in public schools since 1968.