Yes, indeed (catholic==TRUE) would be more generic. But since I'm a die-hard NEXTSTEP/Mac OS X-developer, where "YES" and "NO" are preferred over "TRUE" and "FALSE", it was more natural for me to write "catholic==YES".

Then again, since we should generalize, you are right, the attribute should be "religion" with values like (christian-roman-catholic|christian-protestant|christian-orthodox|muslim|jewish|buddhist|...|other). This would be more generally applicable to (more or less) any human being.

The question is, of course: Would you be considered, even remotely, as a potential candidate, if you have an attribute with (potential) variable values?

Yup, that evaluates to TRUE. (I thought, in my previous post, that you don't need irony-tags at /., but well, you live and you learn)

Being wet is not an attribute of water, in fact water makes wet. If I remember correctly from my physics class:
When a matter is covered by a liquid such as water, that matter becomes wet.
Yes, the Pope, on the other hand, does have to have the attribute "catholic==YES", otherwise it won't work (whatever "it" it is).