Personally for me religion does not mean a thing. I go for the way a candidate stands on the issues that are important to me and also what he has done in office.
Personally I could not vote for a Muslim because as a general rule they want to kill us.
I could not vote for an Athieist because thy are usually Communists also.
So there is my steriotyping right out on my sleeve.
"Not mean a thing"...except...
The above is a contradictory, inconsistent statement.
I would also imagine that if a "conservative" Satanist was running, somehow "religion" would suddenly be meaningful.
So the question is...if a Scientologist was running for president and wanted to swear on a book of Dyanetics instead of the Bible when he ran for president, would that be a relevant "religious" issue.
Basically it's beginning to sound more like a "pious leftist" position of those who spout that a candidate's religious positions are somehow irrelevant to politics, as if those were two hermenitically sealed compartments.