Trying to follow media reports in the US and elsewhere, a question occurred to me.
In the UK, religious beliefs are largely irrelevant to most people. Even those who claim adherence seem to do so in a fairly vague way and it doesn't seem to make much difference.
In the US (it seems to me) it's a much bigger issue. The evangelical Christian movement seems quite powerful politically in various iterations ("family values" etc.) and a movement for "religious freedom". People like Billy Graham's son seem to wield some power.
And yet there's something I don't understand (several things, actually). If religious freedom (including freedom from religion) is the norm, how could a 'Muslim ban' be contemplated, when 'Muslims' are just adherents of Islamic religion in one of its many forms? Are they not included in the 'religious freedom' concept?
Again, it seems to me that relevant questions are not asked of people/politicians/office holders or seekers if they relate to religious beliefs. Relevant because they go to critical thinking. For example, a Christian could be asked whether they believe thew nativity story in Matthew or Luke (and if so, which one, and why), a Catholic could be asked whether they believe that the wafer and wine are literally transformed into the body and blood. Jews could be asked if they believe the OT as literal truth ( the exodus for example). Mormons could be asked about ... well, a whole bucket load of stuff.
Yet this never happens. I appreciate that in most places religious etc. views can't feature in job interviews, when it comes to voting I would really want to know just how gullible the candidate is and how developed is their ability for critical thinking.