Again, this is a matter of terms. But terms are important.
Let me contrast what religions do with what the Gospel of Jesus Christ does:
Most if not all of the world's religions are based on obeying a set of rules, or agreeing to a set of principles or precepts, or following a set of instructions, or performing certain good deeds and avoiding certain bad deeds. In religion, we earn our relationship to God (or peace, or ultimate reality) by doing these things. "If I'm good, God owes me."
The Gospel recognizes that there is nothing we can do to please God, reach God, or earn his love, mercy, forgiveness, or favor. We are too wicked to do that. The Gospel is: Jesus did all of those things on our behalf. He kept all the rules, lived a perfect, moral life, and then gave us credit for it. Then, he took the punishment we deserved on himself. He switched places with us.
Religion divides people into two groups: The moral and the immoral. The moral measure up, the immoral don't.
Anti-religion divides people into two groups: The enlightened, and the backward. The enlightened achieve happiness and meaning, and backwards people (usually religious) are the cause of the world's problems and are dangerous.
The Gospel divides people into two groups: The humble, child-like believer, and the proud, skeptical unbeliever. Those who humble themselves, admit their sin, and believe are saved. The proud, who want to rely on how they do compared to others (those sinners), who reject God's plan of salvation, are rejected.
Remember how Jesus caused a scandal by associating with "sinners"? He ate, lived with, drank, and touched all the wrong people. The immoral woman, the leper, the people society could not touch because they did not "keep the rules" or "measure up."
Does my distinction begin to make more sense now?
Got it. But what does that have to do with whether we wish to vote for a liberal?