science does require faith as it does not offer 100 percent difinitive answers, i have that faith in science but remeber there are mostly theories and not facts in science.also your suggestion would come under so much scrutiny it could never be used, what about Poor ppl and minorities complaining the test is socially biased.and yes there are religious democrats, however if your pro-choice and a catholic you have a major conflict in your life.now of course geography plays a role as proven ppl from the south are not as educated as ppl from the east coast and more religious hence terms like bible belt, now that definitly has something to do with why they vote republican and ppl who believe ancient jews lived in america are at the top of the party. you can also see by the polls how many ppl support republicans on this site. democrat is leading, more than independant and don't care as well.
Whether you "believe" in science is irrelevant. Science doesn't require faith.
Anyway, allow me to offer some clarification, since my previous post was apparently too complex. Your statements are dumb. Illogical. Obnoxious. Unintelligent. You have a very apparent bias toward a particular party and against a particular party, but your argument for such a bias is grounded in emotional nonsense without any bearing on reality. If you truly believe that the Republican Party is the party for the religious, as you describe, then you show an almost offensive lack of education on the subject of party/voter demographics, not to mention an equally nonexistent grasp of the party histories of your/our own country. One of the largest demographics of the Democratic Party, for example, is also about as religious as you accuse members of the Republican Party of being. Something to consider.
You see, that's the sort of nonsense I'm talking about though. People who don't even have the most basic knowledge about political processes or subjects but feel this great passion to vote anyway are part of the reason we're stuck with a de facto two-party system that represents no one. Since not all votes are equal anyway (as it should be; we're not a democracy), I see no reason why it would not be proper and prudent to implement a system that rewards knowledgeable voters and marginalizes those without even that most basic political/subject knowledge.