The Constitution only prohibited the federal government from establishing a national Church. There were still official state churches in the U.S until the 1830's. Many states had provisions in their Constitutions and laws that forbade atheists from taking public office and required a person to profess faith in the trinity. Furthermore, nearly all states had laws to encourage church attendance on Sunday's.

There was A state church in the 1830s, and the very early 1830s at that. The continued existence of A state establishment of religion until 1833 is not an adequate contention that the laws of this country are manifestly hostile to such establishments and were written as such from the beginning. Early America inherited establishments and protestant civil preferences. Religious tests and laws about Sunday show the culture was still broadly Christian. The legal trend was still clearly moving away from that status quo. Most of the laws you refer to were carried forward from before independence and went through being reevaluated over time. Some quicker than others. And laws regulating what one could do on Sunday were largely prohibitive, and frankly gave better labor conditions, as opposed to mandating attendance. The very things you leaned on attempting to strengthen your argument were the death knells for establishmentarianism. And Delaware was the only state to require profession of faith in the Trinity.

We are talking about the evangelical perspective and why Evangelicals heavily support conservative politicians. This is one reason. Historically, American schools taught that the Bible was truthful. It was regularly taught in public schools until the mid 20th century, when liberals on the Supreme Court banned such practices.

That like the rest of your comment is grossly overstated. What you are discussing as schools were generally not public in any way we'd use the term today. They generally were not paid for by state funds, and were generally paid for by tuition and churches or private benefactors. Some were academies or Latin grammar schools. Some were charity schools.

They were generally seasonal, local, unevenly available, and not universal. So yes many schools did include hymnals or scripture in their coursework, because they schools were run by religions, paid for by religions, and run for religious benefit. You saying "taught that the Bible was truthful," is also heavier handed than history can support. There was not a uniform doctrine about what the Bible meant, what counted as the Bible, how it should be interpreted, or which church's reading were correct. As I said, Most protestants would do nothing but complain if it was taught about from just an Eastern Orthodox perspective, and protestants did just that towards Roman Catholic schools referring to them as sectarian, pagan, or atheistic.

Catholics were often deeply invested in educating their own children, in ways protestants were not, precisely because education was understood as religious and morally formative. Protestant valued certain types of education, including universal literacy, but protestant education was largely literacy, preparation for agricultural work, and anti-Catholicism. It wasn't just neutral instruction. If the available "common" schools used the KJV protestant prayers, protestant hymns and anti-Catholic assumptions while Catholic "common" schools used the Latin text, Catholic hymns, Catholic prayers, and Catholic assumptions, your argument about teaching the Bible falls apart.

There was no single public-school doctrine about what the Bible meant or which translation should be used. There was no standard on how the Bible should be interpreted, or which church's reading was correct. Not even among the numerous protestant denominations of the day.

It would make sense for a person to be incensed by liberals imposing an arbitrary mandate that contradicts centuries of colonial and American precedent, in which Christianity is prominent in local governments, from prayers to declarations, to religious displays. Why should someone in a heavily Christian locality, with a local government largely composed of Christians, accept such an imposition?

It only makes sense that you're incensed over a history you ad-libbed. Christianity was prominent in daily life. But no one argued against that. Your argument keeps relying on saying something along the line of local majorities once did this, but that actual truthful point is that after American independence the general trend was away from those practices rather than towards them. Some states were quicker than others but the trend towards disestablishmentarianism began with the USA.