SIPEDO SEZ

I remember when JFK was running and all the Catholics couldn't wait to vote. I am sure that Religion still plays a part when deciding. And divorced or not I have to go with Guiliani, if I had to pick solely from their religion.

Im curious as to why you listed Obama's middle name? and not the others?Were you tryng to spark something?

I'll admit I would have to think twice about voting for a Muslim...call me what you will. Otherwise, it really does not matter to me what religion they are.

"So, with that said, what religion/denomination would you vote for if it was totally based upon religion?"

None; if we're going to elect our representatives based on religion, that's called a Theocracy and it isn't the kind of government under which I'd choose to live. I'll move somewhere where the government is at least honest about what it is -- a dictatorship.

Sorry, sipedo ..... if we're going to elect our government based on their religious beliefs, then we are creating a de facto theocracy, or to use your own words, "by officials who are regarded as divinely guided." That's no where near a representative government (which is what this democratic republic is SUPPOSED to be) of THIS nation as we have ALL religions in this country and fair smattering of those with NO religion.

If one's religious beliefs start becoming the main criteria for holding public office, I'll pack up and leave. I wasn't born under a constitution of Baptists, nor one of Catholics, nor one of Buddhists, nor one of Muslims, nor one of Mormons, ad infinitum ad nauseum. To have a representative government with religion as the criteria, we would have to have a quota -- so many atheists, so many agnostics, so many Catholics, so many ... etc., etc., until every religion/non-religion in the country had an elected representative.

Neither the Senate nor the House of Representatives have sufficient seating room for that kind of mix.