[VRWCmember]

I love it when the biggest religious bigots here on FR - and there are many of them - come back and say “Article VI only applies to the government, not to ME!” somehow conveniently forgetting that ****they are the government****.

So are you suggesting that in my evaluation of two candidates -- one of whom is hostile to Evangelical Christianity and its interpretations of Scriptural principles and one of whom professes Christianity and supports my interpretation of Scriptural principles as they apply to current topics of concern -- when I base my choice in part on the respective philosophies of the candidates I am casting my vote in violation of Article VI of the Constitution?

[xsmommy]

apparently angkor would PROHIBIT consideration of a candidate’s religious beliefs, in his interpretation of the Constitution.

[angkor]

>>>>>supports my interpretation of Scriptural principles as they apply to current topics...... when I base my choice in part on the respective philosophies of the candidates I am casting my vote in violation of Article VI of the Constitution?

That a particular political position happens to mesh with your religious beliefs is irrelevant, because it could very well simultaneously mesh with those of the atheist, the Hindu, the Jew, or the Buddhist. Morals and ethics are not usually the province of some specific religion, but usually are common to the polity.

Beyond that, why would a candidate be discussing the doctrinal and sectarian issues that are pertinent to a specific faith? What’s the point?

Dissing the intent of Article VI as you have done above is no different than dissing Amendments I to X, IMO.