The Bill of Rights was never intended to apply to the states. Yes, I know that it was "incorporated," but that was in total contrast to what the Framers envisioned. The Bill of Rights restrained only the federal government, while protecting the rights of the people and the states. In fact, the establishment clause was originally intended, among other objects, to help protect establishments of religion in the different states, which they didn't want the federal government barging in on.
I think Jefferson, though not actually one of the Framers, explained it best:
"I consider the government of the US. as interdicted by the constitution from intermedling with religious institutions, their doctrines, discipline, or exercises. This results not only from the provision that no law shall be made respecting the establishment, or free exercise, of religion, but from that also which reserves to the states the powers not delegated to the US. Certainly no power to prescribe any religious exercise, or to assume authority in religious discipline, has been delegated to the general government. It must then rest with the states, as far as it can be in any human authority." - Thomas Jefferson, January 23, 1808.
However, that's only one side of the story. The Founding Fathers were pretty clear that just because a state could do something, didn't mean it should. Jefferson, along with many others, thought the states should also work to protect the religious freedom of their citizens. On his tombstone, his authorship of the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom was one of the only 3 accomplishments for which he most wished to be remembered. In it we find this wonderful quote, very applicable to your question:
"[T]o compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions, which he disbelieves is sinful and tyrannical."
And also another great point that Christians (and I am one) seem by and large to have misunderstood:
"Whereas Almighty God hath created the mind free; that all attempts to influence it by temporal punishments or burthens, or by civil incapacitations, tend only to beget habits of hypocrisy and meanness, and are a departure from the plan of the Holy author of our religion, who being Lord both of body and mind, yet chose not to propagate it by coercions on either, as was in his Almighty power to do [...] Be it enacted by the General Assembly, That no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever."
If we care what the Founders thought, and we should, it's not unconstitutional. That said, I think there's good arguments to be made that its both unAmerican, and unBiblical, and that seems quite reason enough.
fortunately this would also violate the WV constitution, making your argument about the federal bill of rights moot.
Uhhhhhh.... no. My point about the federal bill of rights still holds true. You specifically asked if the bill violated the establishment clause of the Constitution. I answered - it doesn’t.
If it violates the state constitution of West Virginia, that’s great but it’s a separate issue and not what you asked in the original post.
That said, I tried to make it fairly clear that I believe this kind of thing is a bad idea and doesn’t work. I’m glad it’s unconstitutional in WV, and even if it weren’t, I would still be opposed to it for a variety of reasons.