I agree with religious conservatives that religious values can inspire one’s political positions. For example, to believe that all persons are children of God means that we are all brothers and sisters. For me, this has implications on how I approach issues like foreign aid, military tactics, human rights, welfare programs and healthcare.

But the move from values to policies is not easy or always clear. My values do not allow me to ignore practical questions like, “Will the program work?” and, “Can we afford it?” Nor do my religious values exempt me from the obligation of finding arguments that will convince others who do not share my faith.

Christians do not have a divinely inspired political program. In fact, I often disagree politically with people of my faith. Non-Christians and non-believers have good ideas and can be outstanding public servants.

As a citizen, I am interested in what motivates political candidates, but as a person of faith I do not want to be pandered to. Nor do I like attempts to hijack God as if he were endorsing candidates.

I think that Huckabee crossed the line when he promoted himself as a “Christian leader” in political ads. I also think that Romney told us more than we needed to know when he said in a speech on religion and politics that “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Savior of mankind.”

The implication of both Huckabee’s ad and Romney’s profession is that being a Christian is a necessary requirement for an elected official. This is wrong. There should be no religious test for public office. Rather, voters should examine candidates’ positions on issues as well as their integrity, philosophy and performance.

I want candidates who can deal with the problems facing our country and the world. I don't care whether their values come from the Bible or from a secular philosophy. No matter where their values come from, their programs and policies must make sense. They must also be able to work with others who come from different perspectives.