Let me be clear first off that I do not think the government should enforce any church, beliefs. Such as if you are not tithing then you are fined, or jailed etc. That is what made the crusades and such so bad. The church had the police power of the State.

But I do believe pastors and preachers should be able to tell their congregations if politicians are going against what the bible teaches. If a candidate is for something that the bible says is wrong, the preacher should let his people know. Example: If a candidate is abortion, I will say something like this "Candidate A thinks murdering babies is O.K. just because it is legal. God does not see it that way. If you vote for a man who is for what God is against, you need to get your heart right with God. You can't be in God's will and vote for people who are for murder." I do the same thing if a person is for same sex marriage, drinking etc.

"In 1954, the U.S. Congress amended (without debate or analysis) Internal Revenue Code

§501(c)(3) to restrict the speech of non-profit tax exempt entities, including churches. Before the

amendment was passed, there were no restrictions on what churches could or couldn’t do with regard

to speech about government and voting, excepting only a 1934 law preventing non-profits from using a

substantial part of their resources to lobby for legislation.

There are many reasons why the 1954 Johnson amendment violates the Constitution. Here are

some of the key reasons why the amendment is unconstitutional:

The amendment violates the Establishment Clause by requiring the government to

excessively and pervasively monitor the speech of churches to ensure they are not

transgressing the restriction in the amendment. The amendment allows the government to

determine when truly religious speech becomes impermissibly “political.” The government

has no business making such decisions.

The amendment violates the Free Speech Clause because it requires the government to

discriminate against speech based solely on the content of the speech. In other words, some

speech is allowed, but other speech is not. The Supreme Court has invalidated this type of

speech discrimination for decades.

The amendment also violates the Free Speech Clause by conditioning the receipt of a tax

exemption on refraining from certain speech. Put simply, if a church wants the tax

exemption, they cannot speak on any and all issues addressed by Scripture. This is an

unconstitutional condition on free speech.

The amendment violates the Free Exercise Clause because it substantially burdens a

church’s exercise of religion. The government does not have a compelling reason to burden

religion in this way.

Churches have too long feared the loss of tax exempt status. Rather than risk confrontation,

pastors have self-censored their speech, ignoring blatant immorality in government and foregoing the

opportunities to praise moral government leaders. Pastors who long to be relevant to society, to preach

the Gospel in a way that has meaning in modern America, often studiously ignore much that goes on in

politics lest they draw attention of the IRS." { http://adfwebadmin.com/userfiles/file/Pulpit Initiativeexecutivesummarycandidates%2031110.pdf}

Religion is a part of most peoples lives. To ignore it would be to set oneself up for failure.

Yes, it should have a part, but no, you cannot use it as your selling point.

If you were to block out religion from politics, you would be blocking out an aspect of a candidates life, and of the life of general people. However, religion cannot dominate politics. The separation of church and state is a good thing.