We cannot depend on the nominal affiliation, but we should be asking how serious the religion is ingrained in the politician. If there is no evidence of religion being taken seriously, then that is a character flaw that to me is worse than having a "wrong" religion. I would much rather have an anti-Catholic Protestant in the old mold than a wishy-washy Kerryesque pseudo-Catholicism.
The Muslim are of course in a category of its own since it is when they do take their religion seriously that we should see them as enemy. However, while I would not want Muslims anywhere near government, again, I respect the sincerity with which many Muslims take their faith.
And that is something I think most if not all Freepers can agree on. I would be quite willing to vote for a conservative pro-life old-school Roman Catholic. (Rick Santorum comes to mind.) I suppose theoretically we might need to ask the question of whether a conservative Roman Catholic places his allegiance to the United States above political commitments to Rome, but that's not a realistic problem in modern politics.
The Revolutionary War was fought not only by committed New England Puritans of the old school and backwoods Scots-Irish Presbyterians, allied with Episcopal planters of the South — the old Calvinist and Anglican leadership of the colonial days — but also by committed Roman Catholics from Maryland who helped persuade the French to support American independence and by Jewish merchants and financiers from New York who had personal ties with Alexander Hamilton and believed a free and independent America would provide a place where Jews could worship freely.
We also need to be honest and admit that the Founding Fathers included men who today would be considered religious liberals at best — men like Franklin and Jefferson, along with people in New England who became Unitarians a generation later and whose theology was already by the 1770s and 1780s seriously deviating from the heritage of New England Puritanism.
We as conservatives are supposed to be Constitutionalists. There are important differences between the Republic envisioned by the Founding Fathers in the 1770s and 1780s and the visions of the colonists for the governments established in the early 1600s. We need to recognize that Roman Catholics have a valid place in the American Republic — a place earned for them by the sacrifices of the heirs of Lord Baltimore who created a Catholic colony in Maryland and then decided to throw their lot with those who sought independence from Britain. The same can be said for the decision by Sephardic Jewish bankers and merchants in New York to cast their lot with American independence.
I have major problems with Roman Catholicism for doctrinal reasons. While I'm a strong supporter of Israel and the Jewish people, I obviously believe Jesus is the Messiah. But as a supporter of the Constitution, I can and should support politically and religiously conservative Catholics and Jews who support the Constitution.
If somebody can't understand that, they need to go back and read their American history — and that includes some of the people who are detractors of Michele Bachmann and may be trying to sow discord within the conservative movement.