What is the point of adding new words about defending all religions to The Coronation Oath?

We are being told that King Charles wants to added wording, before or following the Coronation Oath to demonstrate that he will defend (or maybe respect?) all religions, in addition to the (official) Protestant reformed faith of the Church of England. 

Surely it is widely known that the Church of England respects those of other faiths as it does those of no faith? Does it need to be spelled out? Its main mission is The Great Commission or evangelism which is to share the Gospel of Jesus Christ with those of religion and those of no religion. Supporting freedom of religion is 'a given'. 

There are some other things to consider in this: 

a) no other faith except the English Protestant and reformed faith, as expressed by the Church of England's Thirty Nine Articles and Book of Common Prayer constitutionally needs or requires our King as its Supreme Governor. They all have their own hierarchies and the role of religious head is not missing in them. So why should he wish to treat them equally with the one body of which he is the missing leader (of sorts) i.e. the Church of England? The Church of England is not the same as the Church of Scotland nor the Church of Wales. It is the only body of which King Charles is required to be the head. 

b) Catholics are not wanting King Charles to play a leadership role in the Catholic Church which is led by the Pope and Cardinals in this country; this is equally true of non-Christian religions. 

c) He declared in his Accession Oath that he would solely protect the Presbyterian Church in Scotland but now in relation to England he wants to say that he will defend all faiths. Will England be treated unequally with Scotland? 

d) representatives of non-CofE strands of Protestantism, such as Methodism and of Catholicism, Judaism and indeed of other religions appear at national services and often speak at them. This is already inclusive. 

e) how can you defend all religions if these religions have contradictory objectives? 

Of course, King Charles wants to be king of all his people, whatever their religion, or no religion, though in fact, such a role can only be acheived not by edict but by uprightness of character and duty (as we saw with the late Queen). 

What does 'defending' a religion mean and does it needs a King to defend it? The only obvious 'defending' that the late Queen did of her religion (which was Protestant and reformed) was to share her faith and devotion to Christ during her later annual Christmas broadcasts and to faithfully attend its services. Her final act was to use the funeral service of the Book of Common Prayer - and very impressive it was, too. 

I am not convinced that adding wording on serving, supporting or respecting all religions to the Coronation Oath will have any point.