I am not the first citizen to imagine fulfillment of the preamble to the constitution for the USA, but like other American-underground ideas, recent suggestions are hard to find. There was an auspicious beginning, especially in summer, 1787.
Theists and believers have labeled the preamble "secular," meaning any of anti-religious, anti-faith, anti-doubt, or areligious: It is none of those rather is civic. By "civic" I mean people collaborating for mutual living more than for the municipality, a tradition, or an ideology. The fact that political regimes throughout the nation’s history have imposed religious goals, be they “ceremonial” or not, does not mean that the people cannot fulfill the civic goals. A people who accept the civic contract of the preamble, perhaps updating the 1787 essence for 2017 living, may require elected and appointed government officials to fulfill the preamble, assigning the various religious institutions to the private responsibilities for the believers.
The Federalists seemed to hope that’s the way it would be, and we think Benjamin Franklin said: you have a republic if you can keep it. The First Congress ended the Franklin hope, by establishing governance "under God." Prior inhabitants left to our generation the privilege to establish republican governance instead of governance "under God," if we want to. I consider it our generation's opportunity and privilege.
For these reasons and more, the First Amendment should be revised to protect each person’s duty and opportunity to think, instead of civically supporting religion, a long-standing institution of fear (of what is speculated and yet unproven, perhaps false). Reviewing my published letters to the editor, my first proposal in this regard, on August 7, 1999, was to modify the religion clauses to: “Congress shall make no law respecting religion,” which, taking "respecting" to mean "attending to" or "protecting," would make law strictly civic (neither religious nor its antonym, secular). But it seems President G. W. Bush taught us that an arrogant administration can conclude, “Hey, the First Amendment limits Congress, not [the administration],” and take action regardless of the possibility of a Supreme Court over-call. All three branches should be prevented from imposing religion on a person’s thoughts. Every person could understand this tyranny, but many have been indoctrinated to fear and have not reformed to discover themselves.