How to balance in Politics, Allowing school prayer without Obligating it?

commonly Religions say, "Only ours is good". then they forbid other religious styles. and atheism also blocks some religion too. so jefferson suggested to add to an ammendment, that is now really in first, "no law etc. or prohibit the free exercise" of religion. he was protecting because against limiting religion. *see my mytake, that he t. j. was the unaffiliated "secular" one, and the one protecting religion, the suggestor of this detail, that became an amendment must not limit religion. ironic? but as i introduced here.

Even he was not really secular in contrast to our generation demanding limit and ban school prayer in the name of secularism.

if that is a constitutional idea in an amendment, then it seems odd that a supreme court in 1962 "invalidated" page 5, engel v. vitale, a prayer. cannot and must not limit? that was unconstitutional.

furthermore despite some very loud atheists, still the democratic idea of people choosing policy , would demand obeying the 80% and more "favored prayer in public schools" page 5, because that is what most citizens favor , far more than the 2/3 supermajority, so the representative must represent the supermajority citizens over the loud minority. so how can we balance these angles? without limiting religion as above?

How to balance in Politics, Allowing school prayer without Obligating it?
Post Opinion