Worst Case Scenario
I don't fucking think so. The government of the US is exactly what the Constitution says it is. And the Constitution simply does not provide a role for religion in government . Those who say otherwise are just plain wrong. Those who would attempt to impose their religion by force of law are anti-Constitutional and unAmerican and cannot support their position by any provision in, or perversion of, the Constitution.
That religion was excluded from the Constitution is no accident. Those among the Founders who wanted the United States to have an official religion had their chance to make their case. They discussed and argued this point at length. But when the vote came, that view did not prevail, and the Constitution was created as a secular document. The Founders had a rare opportunity to create a new government on a clean sheet of paper. The Founders were also well aware of the greed, the violence, and the larceny at the heart of Europes theocracies. Given their chance they created a Constitutional goverment devoid of religion.
In fact, religion is mentioned only twice in the Constitution. The last line of Article Six of the US Constitution says, "...no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States." This is a prohibition against religion clearly stating that religion cannot be a condition of government service.
Religion is mentioned again in the First Clause of the First Amendment of the Constitution, in what is known as the Bill of Rights. The First Amendment requires that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..." It's another prohibition. It is a prohibition that applies only to religion. It means that the government cannot dictate or create an official religion for the United States. Period. Government must be neutral on the subject of religion - it can provide no favoritism based on bronze-age superstitions.
"The Constitution simply does not provide a role for religion in government ."
The rest of that clause continues, "...or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;" Some Separation deniers seem to think that this, in effect, negates the prohibition against official religion but it is just one more thing that they are wrong about. It really means that you can believe any ridiculous fairy tale you want but, so can everyone else. That means that your free exercise stops where mine begins. It also means that you cannot impose your religion upon the unconvinced or the unwilling and certainly not with the help of the Constitution.
A lot of deniers think they have the killer argument: Where in the Constitution does it say the phrase "Separation of Church and State"? The implication is that if it doesn't explicitly say it in the text then it ain't so. To this I say, where in the Constitution is the word "Democracy". You will find, surprisingly, that it's not in there. Does that mean we are not a democracy? Of course not. Democracy, like Separation, is not specifically named but is built into the very fabric of the Constitution. Because the Constitution provides for an elected government, we are indeed a democracy. And because the founders provided no role for religion in government, there is no role for religion in government and we do, indeed, have our Constitution as a barrier between civilized people and the return of the Inquisition..
BTW - More words that are not in the Constitution are "Jesus", "Christ", "Christian", or "God". This all ads up to a fatal blow for the hare-brained notion that we are a "christian nation".