It seems to have been acceptable for the current president.
Separation of church and state, Lon. What's legal is allowable.
Politically then, the thread would be mostly over but for a few notes and clarifications, perhaps.
The spiritual aspect is overshadowed by this sections political concerns but...
"Christian" has several layers of meaning. One is how one chooses to identify themselves, by attendance, affiliation, and membership.
In Theology, Christian goes further in depth concerning their relationship with Christ. A gay man may have some grasps of scripture concerning his (or her) relationship with the Savior Jesus Christ. Scripture gives indication whereby "their fruits you shall know them." I believe scripture indicates a person in Christ may very well live inconsistently. 1 Corinthians 6:11 2 Corinthians 5:17 yet scripture prescription is to walk as a new creation Galatians 5:16,17 Paul gave clear directions concerning marriage as 'spiritual' such that there are unions in Christ, and unions of the flesh in his description.
Again, I think whether he/she should be president is indeed a political discussion and I believe you are correct, we have very few qualifications as a country for who can be seated in that office. For me, that alone is an incredibly interesting and meaningful thread all on its own. It seems the forefathers rested in the values of the people to filter political offices. We simply do not address "morally fit" for political office other than as we have insubstantial concerns. -Lon