1: one's religion should be private. well, that's up to the person, isn't it? if someone wants to talk about their religious beliefs, then that is fair game for others to talk about.

2: religious test. of course there is no formal religious test (as you say, it's in the Constitution) but since one's religious beliefs and how they are practiced can shed a lot of light on the character of the person involved, and can often help predict how they will react to certain decisions they may face. For instance: if you believe that Papal Encyclicals are infallible, as a "real" Catholic would, I now know that you have to believe that abortion is murder, that homosexuality is a sin, etc. This is important information to know when hiring a President or public official, don't you think? What is more important, religious conviction or civil law? If you honestly believe something is right, do you not have an obligation to fight for it? (see: Civil Rights Movement) and if you honestly believe something is wrong, don't you have the same obligation, no matter how small of a minority you may be? (see: Abolition)If you honestly believe that abortion is the murder of a human being, do you not have an obligation to do whatever is necessary to stop it? to stop even one? no matter what the law says? And don't I, as a voter, have the right to learn about those core beliefs, which are often, but not always, steeped in religion?

3: no worries there.

4. No one should be ridiculed for their religion, the customs of their religion, or their fundamental foundation (personal and spiritual). This is simply wrong. Sorry, there are some religious practices that are beyond the pale (how about Sharia Law? can we mock someone who thinks women who show their faces in public should be whipped, if not stoned to death? or am I supposed to take that belief seriously as well? What about, well, Polygamy, for instance. is that cool, because someone 'believes' God told them to marry a bunch of 13 year old girls?) here are the questions that matter. If the law says one thing, but your religion tells you another, what are you going to do? Certainly religious conviction and law have conflicted in the past, probably always will. And who are your spiritual advisers? if you only listen to a charlatan like Pat Robertson, I want to know this, because it reflects badly on you. if you only listen to the Dalai Lama, and do whatever he says, then I want to know THAT, to. Basically, who influences you, and why? this are fair questions. Let's look at some other things. if you sincerely believe that God created the world in 7 days and nights (with a day off, no less!) and that fossils are Satan's way of tricking us? I am sorry, you are an idiot and I can ridicule you because that is just dumb. if you believe that Black people are inferior because they are the descendants of Cain, then you are just an idiot, and I will mock you for that. If you believe women are inferior because a poorly translated fairy tale told you so? sorry, you deserve mockery. if you believe that you have to mutilate the sexual organs of your child, against his or her consent, because "god told you to" then that's fine, but I am going to mock you for it. sorry. Religion isn't sacred, it deserves the same scrutiny in the public square as other motivations for behaviour.