Religious people say the laws in America should follow their religion. Why would we do that based on a book about someone you can not prove existed, with writings from people you can't prove existed, with events that are so ridicilous they obviously did not occur, translated by a bunch of guys King George locked in a room in 1609. How can anybody over the age of about 2 believe any of this bullshit. The only things in the bible that are real is some of the people(the bad guys), and some of the places, most of the events are total bullshit.
Noahs ark is my favorite. In order to get the U.S. under water you would have to raise the water level 3 miles(rocky mountains) over the ENTIRE planet. Nat Geo did a study if you melt everything on this world, ice caps, glaicers etc. you would raise the water level 216 ft.
Having only 2 of each animal means about the 3rd generation you're going to have animals with legs growing out of the top of their head.
Just to pick nits, it was King James, not mad King George, although the symmetry would be interesting if it was. And most Christians use more modern translations these days.
However, to your question -- some religious people do in fact believe laws in America should follow their holy book. This desire for a quasi-theocracy is known variously as Christian Reconstructionism or Dominionism. There are many reasons why it's prevalent here in the US, not least, that Eisenhower unwisely advanced the notion in the early 1950s that a pillar of good citizenship was public peity. In theory, any sort of organized religion, but mostly it was a nudge-wink endorsement of white anglo-saxon protestantism. Evangelicals seized on this tacit endorsement and soon the typical conflation of god, jingoistic capitalism and guns was underway, Billy Graham was sucking up to one president after another, the National Prayer Breakfast came into being, etc.
By the 1980s you had the spectacle of Pat Robertson running for President, the rise of groups like Moral Majority, etc.
It all culminated in what we have today, with evangelicalism completely untethered from even pretending to have ethics or moral convictions that aren't for sale, with them fully embracing the situational ethics against which they formerly railed.
I still hold out hope that in Trumpism we have the highest lowest expression of these trends, and it represents the death throes of something that's just not sustainable. The problem is the great danger of us falling down some dystopian rabbit-hole, which could derail human progress for decades or even centuries. There are unfortuantely several plausible scenarios where that could happen. I am clinging to the several plausible scenarios where it wouldn't. Time will tell.