I agree with you.
Some people here on Free Republic, have said they don’t want someone not of a Judeo-Christian religion, in public office.
But such a test falls apart, in my opinion, if Freepers are trying to say, they prefer a so called Catholic Biden, who abhors all the values we believe in, or they would prefer a nominal Christian such as Barack Obama, who likewise abhors our values.
https://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/amendI_religions52.html
… It is apprehended that Jews, Mahometans, pagans, &c., may be elected to high offices under the government of the United States.
Those who are Mahometans, or any others who are not professors of the Christian religion, can never be elected to the office of President, or other high office, but in one of two cases.
First, if the people of America lay aside the Christian religion altogether, it may happen. Should this unfortunately take place, the people will choose such men as think as they do themselves.
Another case is, if any persons of such descriptions should, notwithstanding their religion, acquire the confidence and esteem of the people of America by their good conduct and practice of virtue, they may be chosen.
I leave it to gentlemen’s candor to judge what probability there is of the people’s choosing men of different sentiments from themselves...
I lke Ramaswamy. After all, we’re not electing him pope. A president governs the country full of catholics, protestant, jews, hindus, taoists, non-believers.
The antedecent proposition is flawed. You have no qualifying test.
Biden calls himself a Catholic, that doesn't sustain him as a Catholic.
Obama is a gay, pot-smoking, down-low apostate murtadd Muslim, "nominal Christian" my azz.
Bill Clinton called himself a "Baptist" but their brief church attendance in DC was at Cankles' Methodist church, she came from a hard-core Methodist family, but was Ms Spirit Cooking even a "nominal Christian"?