Mitt Romney made his publicized speech about religion in a bid to defuse the issue of his Mormonism and play to conservative evangelicals. Romney tried to equate what he was doing with John F. Kennedy's famous address in 1960 to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association about his Catholicism.

There are more differences than similarities as Kenneth Woodward points out in an opinion piece in the New York Times. For example, Romney, who is not the Republican nominee, faced a friendly Republican audience, while Kennedy, already the Democratic nominee, faced an audience that was adversarial; many adamantly opposed to a Catholic as president. 

Woodward says that Kennedy was an indifferent Catholic.  However, Romney has been a Mormon pastor and also the equivalent of a Catholic bishop, so his challenge was to avoid explaining Mormon doctrine which he did by only mentioning the word Mormon once.

Romney was addressing fellow Republicans whose party is 79% Christian, so he succeeded in assuring them that there was too much separation of church and state and a risk of establishing a religion of secularism.

One critic of Romney's religious jujitsu speech said, “I was particularly outraged that Romney thinks that the Constitution is somehow based on faith and that judges should rule accordingly......That’s a gross misunderstanding of the framework of our constitutional system."   Absolutely on target.

On religion the First Amendment states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;......."  The United States is not a Christian country; there is no established religion.

However, Romney's religious tolerance only goes so far, as Jonathan Stein at Mother Jones reports, "Romney, though, had a perfect distraction for his doubters, the religious group Americans distrust more than Mormons: Muslims. 'Infinitely worse [than the loss of faith in society] is the other extreme, the creed of conversion by conquest: violent Jihad, murder as martyrdom, killing Christians, Jews, and Muslims with equal indifference. These radical Islamists do their preaching not by reason or example, but in the coercion of minds and the shedding of blood. We face no greater danger today than theocratic tyranny.' "

What about the radicalism of the Christian Crusades, burning "heretics" at the stake, the Mountain Meadows massacre, violence of the Rapture, violent "Christian" video games, and on, and on?  We have theocratic tyranny right here in the good old US.

In a speech that was supposed to address his Mormonism, Romney essentially avoided talking about his religion and agreed with the Constitution about no religious test for officeholders.  However, he disagreed about the degree of separation of church and state and wants less, which appeals to conservative evangelical Christian Republicans who believe, erroneously, that this country was founded as a Christian nation.

There are two former pastors, one Baptist, one Mormon, who are Republican candidates for the presidency.  Each has non Christ like beliefs towards Islam, immigrants, fair and progressive rendering to Caesar, etc. Their views on science, evolution, health care, women's reproductive rights are so reactionary they make one shudder; although Romney flip flops so much it's hard to keep track; but Huckabee is certifiable.

Mixed in with their radical, conservative Republicanism, hidden by Huckabee in phony populism and by both in hypocrisy, is there religious zealotry and theocratic tyranny waiting to be unleashed?