There is too much too say here. I will say that the wording of the First Amendment only intended to prevent the establishment of a national denomination of Christianity. Religion or sect was a common word for denomination a the time and come up frequently when looking at the committee that authored the First Amendment. I’ve written at length about this ,and the absurdity of tying the Fourteenth to the First. See here.

Suffice it to say for this particular post, no one is being forced to take the plate. A governmental vote on something having to do with Christianity is fully within the scope of the First Amendment.

“The ‘establishment of religion’ clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions or prefer one religion over another. Neither can force nor influence a person to go to or to remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion. No person can be punished for entertaining or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attendance or non-attendance. No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion. Neither a state nor the Federal Government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups and vice versa. In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect ‘a wall of separation between Church and State.’” 330 U.S. 1, 15-16.

Unanimous concurrences from any Supreme Court is a rare bird, and the unanimity of this opinion is a culmination of the due process rulings beginning in the 1870’s. The idea that an American citizen would, by simply moving to another State, lose rights and protections guaranteed by the Federal Constitution has been pretty well demolished over the last 140 years. There are disagreements over the details of how the 14th applies to the 1st, but no credible (that I have seen) arguments that it does not at all.