One of the least well known candidates for the US presidential nominations is Republican Congressman Duncan Hunter. In his statement of principles, he includes the following:
The Founding Fathers developed these [First Amendment] clauses to guarantee the right of all citizens to worship and to protect the church from the state, not to strip religion from the everyday lives of Americans.While that might be true, it isn't the whole story. The state also needs protection from churches, and this is a more pressing concern right now.
Congressman Hunter would:
amend the U.S. Constitution and provide blanket protection to all unborn children from the moment of conception by prohibiting any state or federal law that denies the personhood of the unborn. Likewise, I have also introduced the Right to Life Act, which would legally define “personhood” as the moment of conception and, therefore, guarantee all constitutional rights and protections, including life, to the unborn without utilizing a constitutional amendment.And supported:
an amendment to the U.S. Constitution declaring that marriage in the United States shall consist solely of the union of a man and a woman. I firmly believe that children need the unique influence offered by both a father and a mother.I don't share the Congressman's views, but he's entitled to campaign for them. But note that he is advocating amendments to the US constitution that plainly derive from a religious perspective, and citing in support of this an amendment that prohibits the sorts of amendments he is supporting.
American Christian conservatives have this difficulty with the constitution: it's neither Christian nor conservative, but they'd like to think it is. It's radically, amazingly, libertarian, with a small 'L'. Johnny Cash understood it better than the Congressman.