I try not to be a single issue voter. However, the loony religion thing usually comes with lots of lunacy.

It would depend upon the available options but I tend to vote for the candidate that best represents my desire to build a better society for all citizens, Obviously a person with delusional beliefs and an overwhelming faith in any of the various death cults would be low on my list of choices. It is helpful that most of the candidates that have an open religious agenda are also hateful individuals that want to vilify the poor, the aged and the vulnerable in society, it definitely makes my choice easier at election time.

If any candidate speaks about religious beliefs (Romney and Pelosi did the day after the SOTU) I immediately become suspicious of them. Their beliefs can easily lead them to choose beliefs over science. That is why I fear them having power. They and their followers can do enormous damage, all the while believing they are guided by god and thus doing good.
Because all of them profess to being a believer at one time or another, I may be left with voting for the lessor of two evils. Right now, that appears to be ANY DEMOCRAT.

That is way too open a question to answer aptly.
"how many of you would vote against someone soley due to their open religious agenda even if they might have good ideas in other areas"
Degree would matter greatly, is it some moderate Christian who has good social ideas?
Not an issue.
Is it someone like Mike Pence, who wants to make laws that allow religions to discriminate against Gay and womens rights based upon their chosen set of religious beliefs. After all if they see the religion, the text, as teaching not to be "of the world" and thus not to tolerate LGBTQ, womens rights, non believers rights?
Then fuck no.

To even begin to address the issue would require a lot more detail.

Not me,unfortunately believers do it all the time.

Anyone who has a "religious agenda" is by definition a control freak who thinks they have a right to run other peoples lives. Not what i want in an elected official.

Religion doesn't belong in government and if they impress their own beliefs on others they don't belong in office

I have a hard time with putting a person afflicted with religion in a position of power.

Everything in context, with consideration for nuance. Not enough specifics in the given scenario to decide for sure.

Nobody with ANY religious agenda should hold office in this country. By definition, any religious agenda excludes people and ideas.

I would vote no because of the extreme people if they got in power. Can you imagine if Bill Barr was President. He’d probably start an inquisition against us. All secularists, non Christians lumped together as the problem with America today. Look no further than king trump. Using evangelical leaders to authenticate his divine appointment. And he’s using Barr. Be wary people, if things don’t change come the election this November.

No, because open religious agenda will shape the future and give power to the church.
And the churches with power will be able to cast out the good ideas and implement anti science.

Remember, churches play the long game, they think in generations, not in electoral cycles.
Churches don't need to have privileges now, they are happy with the power to indoctrinate the next generation to give them the privileges.

It is the same with a monarchic/autocratic government. One monarch can be good and them you think the system is good, but will the next one be nice? Or what concessions will he need to make to continue in power?

Someone that bases or gives part of his power to religion will be hostage of this religion at some point in time.

Suppose I didn’t … when casting my first vote to elect President James (“Just call me Jimmy” ) Earl Carter Jr… as he continues to walk the walk ~

I distinguish between being open about their religion and having a religious “agenda.” If that agenda coincides with my interests, as has been the case with several christians who espouse a “social gospel,” then I’m typically OK with it. These days, I’ve found that building coalitions is the only way to get big things done. If their agenda, however, is to use political power to advance their religion in the public sphere, I will work against that.

I would vote anyone who uses faith or religious dogma to destroy our way of life, our cultures, and our county wholesale!!!

Just like trump and the obstructionist republicans fascist are doing now to destroy everything we hold dear!!!

That's simple. Given they have a proven track record for keeping there word, not taking sharp corners and are most likely not to be brought out, if the good over-weighs the bad then yes, why not.?

It depends on how strongly religious they are and how rigid they are in their religious beliefs.

Tony Blair wanted to include some religious stuff in a speech during the Iraq war. He was told in no uncertain terms by his political advisor Alister Cambell "The British public does not do God"

Call me a hypocrite but I voted for Jimmy Carter, knowing he was a "Born Again Christian". Having said that, I think he was one of the best "persons" we have ever had as president (and still is). Unlike most "B.A.C"s, he is true to his beliefs and actually embodies the true spirit of Christian doctrine. Too bad more "Christians" are not like him. Most people use their religion as a way to bully others into believing as they do. A true Christian would not be an "Evangelical". They would be like Mother Theresa and help people regardless of what they believed.

I vote for the candidates who express the most agreement with my own ideals. I would hope they don't govern by religion, but in the society of today that can be difficult to find.

I have trouble voting for someone who might think that problems can be fixed by prayer or who may even believe that it is not worth worrying about such things as global warming because god will rescue them. Whether I did vote for them would depend on their opposition. I would still rather see a religious person in power than a right wing fanatic. Always assuming they weren't a psychopathic narcissist right wing fanatic masquerading as a religious person.

If it has to do with religion I'm not in favor of it. I look back at the strangeness of Ronald Reagan welcoming the religious into the Republican Party when Nancy controlled everything by her belief in Astrology.

Well, that depends. If we are talking the likes of Mike Huckabee or Rick Santorum then their religious agenda is shoving their religion down my throat and they don't have any other "good" ideas.

Do you have an example of a person with an 'open religious agenda' that has 'good ideas in other areas'?

You don't get to throw out the assumption that such a creature exists without evidence.
I'd like to read an example. Just like pretty much everything else, the easiest way to show a statement is supportable is to support it.

What's that old saying? It is an ill wind indeed that doesn't blow someone good somewhere. The world is a complicated place and I doubt that you could find anyone with which I disagree with every single attitude they have.

But the more someone believes in fantasy, the less likely it is that I would vote for them.
To put it another way -- the more likely it becomes that I would choose someone else.

I would vote for mayor pete and he is clearly Christian