Mr. McCoy, surely you know that what you've written has nothing to do with the religion test forbidden by the Constitution.

Article 6, paragraph 3 states: "The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the memebers of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States."

The government requires that all who represent us must take an oath of office. The government is forbidden to use religion as a test to determine whether a person qualifies to take that oath of office.

Twisting the Constitution for your own purposes should be seen in the same light as Mr. Huckabee's twisting of religion to suit his own purposes.

Yes, I realize that the prohibited religious test applies as you describe. Please see Mr. Krauthammer's article where he makes the similar point only better than I did.

Many of you folks crack me up every day. Thanks very much for that :-)

A person IS what he or she believes. If you want to elect a person based on what you THINK they will do, go ahead and waste your vote, but the fact of the matter is, that people are who they are, and for the most part, that is how they will behave. To say that you don't think a person's faith matters in an election, would indicate that you would vote for Osama Bin Laden, so long as he told you the proper lies, at the proper time, even tho we know that his faith demands that he destroy the great satan.

You cannot separate the individual from his beliefs.

That is why we are supposed to live under the law of the Constitution, rather than the personal opinion of whomever is in charge at the moment.

Faith DOES matter. Individual doctrine may or may not come into play, but faith defines the individual, and faith does not always involve the Christian God. Its basically, what a person believes, and isn't that important?

you say there should be no winners and losers when it comes to faith. i disagree, because i believe that faith can be very dangerous. the poster above made the point that clearly some faithful radical muslims are "losers."

I think its critical that candidates have their beliefs examined. if someone believes that the earth was created 7000 years ago that shows an absolute lack of ability to gather intelligence and weigh evidence. if someone believes that the book of mormon is an accurate depiction of the history of the americas that shows the same lack of ability to weigh evidence. if a person believes myth over fact the voters should know about it.

Senator Lieberman was opposed for reelection by the National Democratic Party because he refused to support its anti-Israel, pro-Arab, back out of Iraq policy. Doe Lieberman's views have anything to do with the fact that he is an observant Jew who takes his religion seriously? I suspect that his faith acts to keep him skeptical about the hate-America-first kool-aid that the Democratic Party makes its candidates drink.

Look at the presidential candidates in the Democratic Party. They have all pledged their fealty to the unlimited abortion groups, and promised the homosexual rights groups that they would not interfere with gay marriage, the full legal normalization of homosexual practices, and the punishment of anyone who criticizes those practices. Does this look like a party that is going to be a warm place for Mormons? Do you think a Mormon could ever run for president as a Democrat, when he would be the target of these constituencies of the Democratic Party?

The true colors of Democrats were revealed by Lawrence O'Donnell, Hollywood Democrat and former congressional staffer who last week called Mormons "racist" three times in one minute on national TV. When did he call Robert Byrd, the ex-KKK man, racist?