Exactly. Voting for someone just because they call themselves a Christian is dumb. (Clinton called himself a Christian, which shows that 'faith labels' don't work.)
Before you post, scan the post better of what you're responding to. I said in #1061: I do not weigh the above in isolation; a candidate's character and values, position stances on social issues, voting and public track record, etc. are also important to integrate into the entire package.
Sometimes a candidate's values, position stances on social issues, voting & public track record will betray what they are telling us about their faith. (Kind of like a certain New England gov who was pro-abortion in the mid-90s despite saying he was LDS who believed in pre-existent spirits awaiting bodies in the womb to inhabit)
In Clinton's case, he didn't even believe that life began until birth. (According to Time mag, he based that on the religious stance of his pastor) So this was a religious belief in his case.
But for too many folks around here, they would tell us not to be critical of Clinton's religious beliefs.
What fools. Wave a magic wand over any belief, designate it as sacred and therefore untouchable to criticism, and you can get away with most anything.
If the "don't criticize a candidate's religion" are consistent, then they have to compromise and say, "Well, I guess we can't be too hard on Clinton for having a religious belief that life begins at birth."