This is so completely removed from the chick at Disney it isn't even funny. Having a memorial with a cross, or Star of David, or Muslim Crescent isn't "practicing religion". And it certainly isn't establishing a state sponsored religion.
How so? You brought up the freedom of religion. Putting up a cross is a practice of a religion. Since you are the one that mention the association between these roadside crosses and religion, then I brought out the fact that freedom of religion does not grant the right to freedom of practice. The principles behind the two examples, while dissimilar in appearance, are the same. Also when you look up the word religious practice it is refering to a religious ritual. Are you tell me now the act of placing a cross at a memorial for the dead is not a religious ritual? Are you telling me that wearing a Hijab around is not a religious ritual? While the rituals are different, they are still both rituals. Rituals can be restricted by the government. End of story there.
As for the second sentence in that paragraph, you are right and wrong there. It is not a direct sponsorship or endorsement, but an indirect one. It would be akin to a business that does not belong to the BBB, but still puts the symbol on their door to drive in customers. Is the BBB endorsing them? or are they using an indirect endorsement? So what if the BBB finds out and asks them to take it off, aren't they entitled to that? Is that any different than the government finding out that someone is using them as an indirect endorsement and they are asking now for that to be removed?