Rather than worrying about whether Mormons worship the right God in the right way, Republicans should insist that only Mormons run for president. Only half-joking.

Anyone watching the Republican debates, especially Tuesday's on the economy, can't be missing the obvious. The two smartest, coolest, most independent, and least ideological -- this is to say, most presidential and electable -- candidates are the two Mormons, Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman.

It is utterly ludicrous that at this point in our history some conservatives insist on raising the question of religious belief in a presidential election. The latest embarrassment comes from a Texas pastor and Rick Perry supporter, who said recently that Mormonism is a cult. If the "cult" of Mormonism means you raise a solid family, work hard, make money and do good for the greater community of mankind, then by all means pass the Kool-Aid.

Regrettably, we have but one presidency and two Mormons. Both Romney and Huntsman, as former governors, would bring considerable talent to the White House -- Romney primarily on the economy and Huntsman, also onetime ambassador to China, on foreign policy. If anything, Republicans should be trying to figure out how best to use them both.

Two Mormons on one ticket? Wouldn't happen, but it might/could/should.

Romney has been at politics longer and, according to Republican tradition, it's his turn. He's also the candidate most qualified to win a national election, where swing votes and independents matter. The Republican "base," which insists on a purity test on social issues, and tea party conservatives, who insist on a perfect record of anti-government rhetoric, may as well be working for the Democratic National Committee.

For those needing a primer on why it's un-American and counterproductive, not to mention medieval, to also require a religious test, Romney provided an eloquent lesson four years ago. In his "Faith in America" speech, he reminded Americans of why and the ways we honor freedom of religion in this country. Romney recognized the role of religious life in the public square and acknowledged the divine source of liberty. But he also declined to dignify the insistence of some that he explain his personal beliefs:

"There are some who would have a presidential candidate describe and explain his church's distinctive doctrines. To do so would enable the very religious test the Founders prohibited in the Constitution. No candidate should become the spokesman for his faith. For if he becomes president, he will need the prayers of the people of all faiths."

Sometimes, especially within the African-American community, the roles of politician and preacher have overlapped. Even Republican contender Herman Cain is, in addition to being a businessman, a minister. This intersection has been tolerated because the black church historically was the only place those isolated by segregation could congregate and speak openly about issues of concern, including voting rights. The tradition remains, but the need for the overlap has expired. Bless Cain for saying so last Sunday on CNN's "State of the Union."

Asked about the Mormonism-as-cult comment, Cain replied: "I'm not running for theologian in chief. I am not going to do an analysis of Mormonism versus Christianity."

Amen, brother.