Ohio School Takes Down Jesus Portrait

[The Grand Nudger]

However, if the Muslim believed any particular law should be approved because he felt religiously obligated to support it, he should be free to base his decision on that.

He is free to base his decision upon that, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't violate a principle of secular government. I'm sure it wouldn't be so difficult to find some other reason to support the law. His freedom to exercize his religion does not extend to exercizing it with the power of the state. To put it simply "casting gods vote" is not something I'm ever going to allow anyone to excuse, in our government.

Another law-making can just as easily oppose such law on other grounds.

if that law would violate his free exercize of religion then I'd agree. But if, for example, he opposes the rights of another to marry,.because god told him it was icky......
(notice the lengths that our reps go through to establish that this is not the reason they oppose such marriages, or the laws surrounding them officially?...do you know why? because they'd get called out on it)

That's democracy. But its a step to far to say that lawmakers should not look to their faith for divine guidance in the performance of their job.

We're not a democracy. That would be a step too far, but since you're the only one taking that step...I don't know why I'm being asked to defend that step...... I would add, though, that anyone who has to ask god how to perform the duties entrusted to him may not deserve the trust that was granted by the voter. I don't want to think that my reps can't handle being reps without cribbing from some god.....