And I don't see your focus on "context" as a bid for wisdom through gaining proper perspective, but as a stratagem you use to avoid getting the relevant but inconvenient details right. And I'm quite tired of that.

The nation (not first colony) was founded (i.e. Declaration of Independence, Bill of Rights) in a transient period of unusually high levels of religious tolerance. This "precision" view is monumentally important for understanding the evolution of the country because it was enshrined in the founding documents of the country by people whose influence has far outlasted that of their contemporary detractors.

This has set up a perpetual tension between the religious zealots who came to the U.S. to be zealots free from the oppression of zealots elsewhere, and the founding principles of the country that insist that the zealots apply the same freedom to everyone else now that they're here. It's possibly the deepest anti-intellectual populist / intellectual elitist division in the United States, and the elitist vision won the day at the most critical juncture in history.

To the extent that religious tolerance has failed to get atrociously bad at some junctures, and has gotten better at others, it has in large part because of this.

You dismiss this as "quibbling". It makes about as much sense to me as declaring that the Earth is a water planet, and any mention of continents is "quibbling".

I have no interest in arguing for its own sake.