"We don't want a godless Prime Minister!" called the pastor on a rumbling truck atop of Canberra's Mount Ainslie to his congregation. There they were, Catch the Fire ministry, massed on a cold Saturday morning to engage in "spiritual warfare" to see "ungodly forces" removed from parliament. Unlike the last "exorcism" (and yes, this is round two in Catch the Fire's attempts to rid Canberra of evil spirits) Danny Nalliah, the ministry's head, focused especially on our non-believing PM and the potential damage her atheism could cause in office.

But as Goanna stood there observing the scene of Nalliah devotees (who are also naturally voters in this election), the question did arise, Julia's atheism is going to be a divisive issue for some, but in 2010, is it really going to affect the way people vote?

In America, survey after survey confirms that US voters would rather anyone but an atheist. A woman, sure; homosexual, maybe; but atheist, no way José. In the latest of these in 2007, only 45 per cent would vote for one, even if they were competent and capable.

But in Australia, and more specifically on Mount Ainslie in Canberra, a different, young, pierced, yellow t-shirt-wearing response popped up. There they were, the Australian Sex Party, in protest, on the other side of this question, proudly demonstrating: No! Julia's an atheist and who cares? Elections are about policies, visions for the country. Conversely gender and religion is soooo whatever.

But of course, that's what elections should be about. This election — now on knife's edge — however, has also very firmly been about image, more so than any other election in living memory. Real Julia, Real Action, Moving forward and very little to distinguish the two candidates other than superficial impressions. And if we're simply working off who "feels" better, what personality we like more, then maybe personal beliefs, or lack of them could well be a factor in this election.