The idea that the religious beliefs of politicians should be a private matter and not affect their politics is an idea from the French Revolution, not the American. The French Revolution threw off both the king and the cleric. Religion was and is a private matter that one isn’t supposed to talk about. You practice it (if you practice it at all) in a private, quiet way. The American Revolution threw off not "king and cleric" but king and state religion. Our roots were largely in the Puritans who wanted to purify the Church of England. The distinction is subtle but important. The place religion has in life is what is different. There are those who fear candidates who have strong religious beliefs. Surely, there are some candidates like that who should be feared but it shouldn’t be a blanket statement against religion in politics.

Sometimes Christianity is portrayed as homophobic, misogynist, intolerant, etc. while Islam is put forward as a religion of peace. This post highlights an article in the New York Times that, while attempting to show the more human face of Islam, really highlights the opposite. It is about gay Muslims and their struggle.