Across America’s 50 states, Christians occupy churches, cathedrals and federal offices. This religious group contributes to around 60% of the U.S.’s population and advances the country and the world in innumerable ways. For politicians, however, this ideological majority provides an easy jumping-off point for campaigns: morality. Although government action must remain secular in accordance with the Constitution, leading politicians, especially conservative ones, hold their Bibles up as badges of honor, a symbol that God guides them toward a brighter future for His country — an idea carried into modernity from the era of Manifest Destiny.
Christian nationalism describes a political ideology that promotes reimagining the U.S. as a Christian nation: lived in, led by, and governed in accordance with Christians. As the 1970s drew to a close, this ideal, not representative of the religion as a global whole, impacted voters to a degree far from the decades that preceded it. Calls to return to morality strode alongside the growth of televangelists, a group of Protestant Christians who capitalized on spreading their message on television, typically concentrating on instilling fear of hell. President Ronald Reagan took this movement in stride, promising to return to the traditional social structures and economic success of the 1950s, goals touted as positive by the emerging sect. He appealed to the so-called moral majority and re-invigorated the conservative movement, which Presidents Eisenhower and Nixon had set in motion a decade before. Although this self-proclaimed lamb of God received immense support in his time, he now stands as a controversial figure in American politics, facing criticism both for his contributions to wealth inequality and the way his presidency provided a safe haven for White supremacist and exclusionary ideologies.
Although openness about religion should reflect positively on politicians — regardless of the beliefs they discuss — when a politician uses these ideas as bargaining chips or policy shapers rather than personal guidance, Americans should worry. President Trump, for example, sold copies of the Bible with American law documents inside during his campaign. To the public, this action teetered on the edge of constitutional separation of church and state while the candidate profited off his supporters’ belief. For this action, he faced criticism from all sides of the political spectrum, particularly in light of the hefty price of his product, one that contradicts the common Christian idea of access to religion. For Christians outside of his supporter base, Trump’s open claim to the church leaves a bitter taste, particularly considering his history of sexual crimes and the value he places on wealth.
“With the current administration, I don’t see any Christian ideals really being represented. I feel like it attracted people who claim to be Christians for the title but don’t actually follow Jesus, evidently. It feels like propaganda: Trump claiming to make America great again and people actually believing him. I don’t feel like he appeals to real evangelicals, and I believe that because my dad is one and he doesn’t support Trump, neither does he think what he’s doing is aligning with Christianity. The nationalism part inherently conflicts with Christianity because loyalty is only supposed to be endowed to God and not a country. Politicians for sure try to use what they claim is religion — but often isn’t — to control others while they pass tariffs and immigration policies that conflict with Christianity because Christians are supposed to help and love everyone and not make living harder for the greedy benefit of themselves,” freshman Kamryn Hill said.
Though the contribution of religion to individuals’ principles persists as admirable, the way these ideologies infiltrate the law limits the freedom of religious expression for people who do not identify as Christian. This form of nationalism encourages the reformation of the U.S. into an almost theocratic nation, one that excludes or outlaws alternative religious beliefs. This almost fascist tendency already appears in book bannings that target world religions and in laws which subsidize Christian curriculum in public schools, with several prominent politicians even expressing a distaste for the separation of church and state. This issue grows apparent in light of Trump’s new Faith office, which, on paper, supports freedom of religion and furthers funding for religious organizations. In reality, the new leader of the office, Paula White, works as a televangelist, so the actions of the office fall under global scrutiny for a pro-Christian bias. By limiting access to alternative beliefs, especially for children, these policies hinder exploring one’s family’s religious expression while shepherding unknowing youth toward another. Though Christian nationalists claim they protect their own rights with these laws, they impede others’ instead, a hefty trade-off for a historically unconstrained group’s continued domination.
These policies can even hurt Christians and evangelists who, on an individual level, might need access to what the new laws limit. For instance, politicians who capitalize on Christian nationalism tend to create strict abortion access laws based on the spiritual, not scientific, beliefs on fetal development. This limited medical assistance can impact expectant mothers, even those who do not wish for an abortion, as doctors in states with anti-abortion laws can struggle to perform medically necessary abortions or expel miscarriage materials from women’s wombs. This increases the risk of death and serious illness to a concerning degree, regardless of denomination. In whole, Christian nationalism misuses and even detracts from American protections over freedom, religious and otherwise.
“I think it’s definitely blatantly violating the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment. There’s always been a slight intersection of Christianity in the government — with the Pledge of Allegiance and ‘one nation under God’ — but the lines have been completely blurred. The founders decided to include religious freedom as a protected right because they believed it to be an unalienable right. These days, with Christian nationalist rhetoric plaguing the political sphere, there seems to be more harm brought to people practicing a non-Christian religion. While their freedom is still protected under the Constitution, they must abide by legislation based on Christianity, such as abortion legislation,” senior Ashley Williams said.
Supporters of Christian nationalism tend to argue that the ideology simply represents the voters’ views, therefore helping them identify which candidate represents them. While this take certainly maintains an aspect of truth and the religion in itself declares endless positive resolutions, the push for a Christian politician allows world leaders to focus on hot-button topics through a religious, and frequently conservative, lens, even while they pass laws which tended to fall away from Christian love-thy-neighbor ideology — such as Trump’s defunding of necessary medical research and illegal deportation of men, women and children, regardless of actual immigration status. This appeal to audience emotion and religious conviction provides a tool for politicians to gain power while withholding vital information from voters who might act differently otherwise. Though American heroes throughout history have used religion to guide their actions and even rally support, these heroes rarely allowed the belief to impact law, instead using it to demonstrate the public support for an otherwise constitutional action.
Nationalism, regardless of the flavor, inherently harms everyone in a nation and in the world. It contributed to the tensions which ignited both world wars, and it creates a sense of exceptionalism which hinders tangible progress. It also promotes a sense of nativism, which in America and internationally has led to organized racism and ethnic cleansing. Although patriotism runs in the United States’ veins, creating a non-exclusionary pride in one’s country will ultimately maintain it.
“I don’t know how to explain it, but the rise of Christian nationalism in politics is causing group polarization among conservatives, and people are just getting more and more… hateful to other religions. So people can’t even freely exercise their religion. Marjorie Taylor Greene, a known Christian nationalist and U.S. representative, received attention when her ex-husband harassed three praying Muslim women and told them to go back to their country when they are from [the state of] Georgia. Besides his blatant disregard for the law, this incident shows that Christian nationalist rhetoric is heightened by the increase of conservatism and is, as a result, further infringing upon freedom of religion,” Williams said.
Simply on an individual scale, religion’s infiltration into politics can break down friendships and families who could previously debate amicably on political grounds. Now, liberal grandchildren grow into traitors of God and economically conservative friends become forceful Bible-thumpers. Partisanship can kill democracy, but religious sectarianism annihilates love.
Ultimately, the growth of this, to mainstream interpretation, unbiblical and unconstitutional ideology, maintains a deep connection to the rise of other forms of government and social control. From anti-intellectualism to white supremacy, this shift toward extreme conservatism shares the dog whistles present in early Nazi Germany, although that nation’s evil remains of its scale. The current administration, one that benefits from Christian nationalists’ shepherding America’s church-goers into the polls, does not represent the people-loving faith it depends on. Regardless of the papal garb Trump may post an AI-generated likeness of himself in, he depends on a charismatic instillment of fear — fear of hell, fear of the “other,” and fear of change— to build up a cult-like following, a following that believes God sent him to lead America into totalitarian Christian tyranny, or a return to its “great” historical standing.
