My essential question is: Why should religion not be incorporated into governing? Like how in the novel the Puritan rulers used their moral beliefs to sentence criminals and make judicial rules.

The first amendment of the U.S. constitution guarantees the freedom of religion. Which establishes one point that anyone anywhere within the borders of the United States has the right and ability to freely exercise their religious beliefs and practices. This should and does includes government officials. Who should also be allowed to freely practice religion.

But, because there is freedom of religion that also means that the government cannot enforce one single religion. No matter what the ruler(s) believe they cannot enforce their religion as the national religion in the United States.

Moving away from just the US specifically, and moving into world wide. Now, I do not know all the rules for every country everywhere. But, to some extent everyone can choose where they live. So if you are not Muslim you should not live in a Muslim country.

When a person is involved in a religion they should be transformed by their beliefs and practices. So if a governor has a faith they should act differently because they believe. Which should impact the way they rule because they are different.

So the people who elect the ruler should understand that any good religious person will act differently based on their religion. A person’s morals should change the way they act and make decisions. so if a voter does not want a Christian ruler, they should not vote for a Christian.