mandatory blog entry about the 2008 Elections

I think it is a rule that every blogger has to write at least one entry about the 2008 election. This is mine.

But actually, I have a question that I have been worrying about for some time. In much counsel there is wisdom. So I want to lay the question before the world and see what wisdom rears up to whap me up-side-the-head. Here goes:

What part should I allow (my perception of) a candidate's status as a Christian (or lack thereof) play in my decision to vote for / against him?

If a candidate is a conservative evangelical believer that is clearly a plus for him. If a candidate is a non-Christian that is clearly a minus for him. So if one candidate is clearly a Christian and his opponent is clearly not, is my decision made? Or do I consider other things - say - their stated position on the issues or my perception of their character - as well? How much weight do I give to each?

Are there degrees of being Christian and not-Christian? If conservative evangelical is the best, then is conservative main-line next best? And what is worst - Islamic? agnostic? Mormon? secular-humanist-atheist? Can I put them on a number line from best to worst? If I could, would it be valuable?

Right now I am hoping that most of the options will be essentially moot before primary election day rolls around in Texas (March 4). Because I don't know who I should vote for. Today the guy with the "best" position Christianity-wise (Huckabee), and the guy with the "best" position issues-wise (Romney) are both trailing the guy that I like the least (McCain). At least we don't have the guy who was publicly cheating on his wife still a viable option.

& don't get me started on the democrats! The problems with the republicans are bad enough.