Religion is a Mental Illness

Has Christian Nationalism Intensified or Faded?

Comparing Survey Data from 2007 and 2021

graphsaboutreligion.com

There's been no bigger term in religion and politics over the last five years than "Christian Nationalism." I went to graduate school between 2005 and 2011, and I can say with a great deal of certainty that I never read that term in any research I combed through for my coursework or dissertation. My, how things have changed.

I just did a quick search for the term on Google Scholar, and across the first thirty articles and books that appear, 21 of them have been published in 2020 or later. That's not typically the case with other queries of the literature; it's usually heavily tilted towards older works that tend to have a lot of citations. All that to say - academic work on Christian Nationalism is very much in its embryonic stage.

I can easily list seven books specifically dedicated to Christian Nationalism that have been released in the last few years:

1. Taking Back America for God by Perry and Whitehead (2020)
2. The Flag and the Cross by Gorski and Perry (2022)
3. American Idolatry by Whitehead (2023)
4. Preparing for War by Onishi (2023)
5. Red State Christians by Denker  (2022)
6. The Everyday Crusade by McDaniel, Nooruddin, and Shortle (2022)
7. The Full Armor of God by Djupe, Lewis, and Sokhey (2023)

It's all happened so fast that it's hard to get our arms around a pretty basic question in the discussion about Christian Nationalism - are those sentiments increasing or decreasing in the general public? Well, now I can answer that with a great deal of specificity.

If one is looking for the empirical foundations of the Christian Nationalism debate, it’s in a series of statements that were posed to respondents in the Baylor Religion Survey back in 2007 - Wave II. They are as follows: 

1. The federal government should advocate Christian values
2. The federal government should allow prayer in public schools
3. The federal government should allow the display of religious symbols in public spaces
4. The federal government should declare the United States a Christian nation
5. The federal government should enforce strict separation of church and state
6. The success of the United States is part of God’s plan. 

Response options ranged from strongly disagree to strongly agree. The middle option is undecided. I know that there's a lively debate about defining Christian Nationalism and whether these questions are tapping that concept accurately. I am going to sidestep that discussion entirely here. The authors I mentioned above are much more well-versed in those debates than I am. My focus here is narrow - I just want to see how responses to those questions have changed over time.

I can do that because the fine team at Baylor did another survey in 2021 that asked the exact same questions. That’s fantastic because we can compare apples to apples in terms of longitudinal changes. So, enough with the preamble. Let’s get right to it. 

I think it's fair to say that the results point to the fact that Christian Nationalism is fading in the general population. That's evident in a number of these statements. For instance, in 2007, 55% of folks said that the government should advocate Christian values. In 2021, that share had dropped to just 38%. That's substantial.

Additionally, 69% thought that the government should allow prayer in public school in 2007 - that declined to 55% in 2021. There was a nineteen-point drop in the share of respondents who say that the government should allow the display of religious symbols in public spaces. In 2007, a bare majority (51%) agreed that the government should enforce a strict separation of church and state. That increased to 62% in the most recent data.

The only real oddity to me is the last statement: the success of the United States is part of God’s plan. In 2007, just 32% of people agreed with that one. In 2021, that actually rose to 37%. I don’t have a good explanation for that one.

Taken together, I think it's empirically defensible to say that Christian Nationalism has declined significantly since 2007. But, there's a caveat here. The share of Americans who were nones in 2007 was about 16%. It was nearly 30% in 2021. So, a lot more nones in the sample would drive down Christian Nationalism. In the Baylor sample, 11% were nones in 2007. That increased to 19% in 2021. So, let's just exclude them and do the same analysis.

That's reassuring because our results really don't change that much. Agreement with the Christian values statement has dropped by 17 points. It's down 14 points for the statement about prayer in public school, and it's declined a whopping 18 points on allowing the display of religious symbols in schools. The percentage who want a strict separation of church and state has jumped 12 points as well. The results in the first graph are not just an artifact of the declining number of religious folks in the sample - even the religious folks are less willing to embrace Christian Nationalism based on these six statements.

But, let's not stop there. I created a scale of Christian Nationalism. When someone strongly agreed with a CN statement, that was scored a 5; if they strongly disagreed, that was a 1. If someone was unsure, that was a 3. I added the scores from all six statements, then I subtracted six. So, the scale runs from 0 to 24.

I calculated the mean for six different religious groups in both 2007 and 2021. It's pretty apparent that Christian Nationalism has retreated among most of them. For evangelicals - their mean score was 15.9 in 2007. That dropped to 13.8 in 2021.

But the drop for mainline Protestants was huge, from 16.3 in 2007 to just 10.4 in 2021. That's six points on a 24-point scale. Maybe the discourse about CN has permeated more into the mainline, and it's pushed some members away from embracing statements that could be indicative of Christian Nationalism. I don't have a great answer for that big shift. For Catholics, the shift was a bit smaller (from 12.4 to 9.7), but still a noteworthy decline.

Black Protestants are a real puzzle that needs additional exploration. In 2007 their mean score was 12.3, and that didn't change at all in 2021. One thing worth pointing out is that the sample of Black Protestants was 351 in 2007 and only 96 in 2021. That may play a role, but I'm not entirely certain.

So, that's the change at the top level. How about looking at each of the six statements individually to get a better sense of where the movement has occurred?

To me, this is where those shifts in the mainline really become clear. In 2007, 79% of mainline Protestants said that the government should advocate Christian values. That dropped to just 40% in 2021. That's huge. And the mainline numbers are also way down on other questions too. It's a drop of 29 points on the question of allowing prayer in public schools and a 23-point decline on allowing religious symbols in government spaces. There's no doubt in my mind that Christian Nationalism is much less pervasive in the mainline today than in the late 2000s. The only problem is the share of Americans who are mainline is dropping rapidly, so this is having less of an impact on the aggregate numbers.

There are drops for evangelicals here, but they are more modest. Thirteen points on the Christian values question, six points on allowing prayer in schools, and eleven points on allowing religious symbols in public spaces. But the share of evangelicals who want the government to declare the United States a Christian nation is unchanged - 43% in both surveys.

Let's take a step back from religious tradition and move to political partisanship to finish this post. Again, the same six statements but this time the sample is broken down into Democrats, Independents, and Republicans.

A Democrat in 2021 was half as likely to say that the federal government should advocate Christian values as they were in 2007 (42% down to 20%). They were 21 points less likely to say that the federal government should allow prayer in public schools and 23 points less likely to support the display of religious symbols in public spaces. It's pretty clear to me that Democrats have become much less supportive of many of these statements compared to 2007. That's probably due in no small part to the increasing God Gap.

For Republicans, the shifts are less dramatic. There's been a ten-point decline in support for the first three statements (Christian values, prayer in schools, and religious symbols). And there's been a 21-point increase in the share of Republicans who say that the government should enforce a strict separation of church and state.

But, that's not the whole story. The share of Republicans who say that the government should declare the U.S. a Christian nation has risen by 5 points since 2007 (from 40% to 45%). And the share who say that the success of the United States is part of God’s plan has jumped 13 points during this same time period (from 46% to 59%). So, it's fair to say that it's a bit of a mixed bag when it comes to Republicans and Christian Nationalism.

When this data is looked at broadly, it's generally true (but not universally the case) that Christian Nationalism has retreated over the last several years. That's especially true for mainline Protestants, Catholics, and Democrats. But there is evidence here that evangelicals are also less likely to embrace some sentiments related to Christian Nationalism as well.

Why these declines have happened is not an easy question to answer. Whitehead and Scheitle found that the average Americans link to religious symbols is highly contingent upon current events. Thus, the aftermath of January 6th and the subsequent discussion of Christian Nationalism pushed some away from many of these sentiments.

It could be the rise of the nones, but that doesn't appear to be the whole story. It could be more people have become aware of this debate in 2021 when there was little discussion of Christian Nationalism in 2007. Or it could be simple generational replacement - younger birth cohorts are just less strident in their beliefs and the most fervent supporters of CN have largely died off in the last 14 years.

Either way - this longitudinal data should help situate the large discussion about Christian Nationalism in 2024.

The Navajo Nation’s Spiritual Battle for the Moon

It’s time for the US government to stop its unconstitutional preference for Native American religion.

realityslaststand.com

Recently, the Navajo Nation has embarked on a mission to stop flights to the moon, especially those intending to deposit human cremated remains (commonly referred to as “cremains”). The Navajo Nation regards the moon as sacred, arguing that depositing cremains—or any objects, for that matter—constitutes an act of desecration. This controversy centers around the Peregrine Mission 1, a NASA-spon.sored expedition to the moon. Two private companies, Celestis and Elysium Space, plan to use this mission to transport the cremains of individuals who opted for a lunar resting place.

Upon receiving a letter from Buu Nygren, the Navajo Nation’s President, the White House convened a meeting to hear their objections to those flight plans. Although the White House correctly concluded that the government did not have the authority to stop the flight or hinder the private companies’ plans, one may wonder why these religious concerns of the Navajo Nation were ever seriously considered in the first place. Typically, the U.S. government refrains from interfering in scenarios where religious beliefs are at stake, as evidenced by the longstanding conflict between fundamentalist Christian creationists and the teaching of evolution in schools.

Yet, the case appears different when it involves Native American traditional religions—a loosely defined amalgamation of beliefs, often intertwined with Christian elements, and lacking formal sacred texts. In these instances, the US government has been bending the First Amendment of the Constitution so greatly that it is bound to snap.

The First Amendment of the US Constitution clearly states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.” This means that the federal government should be neutral towards all religions, avoiding favoritism to any denomination. Although the U.S. Government generally avoids supporting or discriminating against specific religions, as demonstrated by the diverse holiday displays ranging from nativity scenes to the Satanic Temple altar in Iowa, traditional Native American religions have been the exception to this strict adherence to the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause.

This exception is evident in NASA’s collaboration with the Navajo. In NASA’s 108-page education guide, “Story of the Stars,” intended for “Classrooms and Community-Based Educational Events,” Navajo religious beliefs are treated as being of equal importance to NASA’s scientific research. On page 3, the guide contains a statement from the Navajo: “We are the Holy People of the Earth. We are created and placed between our Mother Earth and Father Sky.” Further evidence of religious support in this guide is a story stating, “After the creation of the Earth, sky, and the atmosphere, the Holy people realized the whole university was entirely dark.” It is interspersed with tales of sacred directions, seasons, beliefs, and rules of life. Notably, in the acknowledgements, Leland Anthony Jr. is listed as the project’s “spiritual advisor.”

Given this content on NASA’s website, it’s hardly surprising that the White House would hastily convene a meeting with the Navajo Nation to consider the validity of objections to moon flights. However, these considerations favor one religion and teach one religion, thereby violating the US Constitution.

Another example of the Federal government showing a denominational preference appears in the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA). Enacted in 1990, NAGPRA aids in the repatriation and reburial of human remains and artifacts deemed “sacred,” or as grave goods, or objects of cultural patrimony. A specific instance of this favoratism within NAGPRA is the requirement that at least 2 of the 7 individuals on the review committees “must be traditional Indian religious leaders.” Additionally, each NAGPRA meeting begins and ends with a “traditional Indian prayer.” For example, Armand Minthorn’s prayer at the January 5, 2023 meeting started with, “Today, as we come together, we thank our Creator for our life, our family, and our friends. And we ask our Creator today to give us strength and courage to go on and go forward.”

Perhaps most troubling is the acceptance of Native American religious creation myths as evidence for present day tribal affiliation to past populations. These tales have been leveraged to empty museums and universities of research collections–collections that might otherwise contribute to advancements in forensic identification techniques, aiding today’s Native American crime victims.

Final examples of the US government supporting Native American religions involve discriminatory practices based on sex. For instance, at the Smithsonian Arctic Studies Center, religious traditions led Inuit elders to forbid female archaeologists from handling certain artifacts. Similarly, when the California Department of Transportation archaeologists collaborated with the Kashaya Pomo tribe, the tribe’s religious protocols dictated that menstruating women be isolated, prohibited from conducting fieldwork, kept away from Native elders, and forbidden from talking about spiritual topics!

It is time for the US government to stop its unconstitutional denominational preference of Native American religions. Stopping these preferences would uphold the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause, protect scientific endeavors, and prevent discriminatory practices.

Destroying a Satanic Display Goes Against America’s Founding Principles

Liberal, secular democracies cannot afford to accommodate extremists’ notions of heresy or blasphemy if they want to remain liberal, secular

realityslaststand.com

1. Satanism, as advocated by the Satanic Temple, is not a real religion, and so does not qualify for religious protections. Consequently, the statue had no right to be in the Capitol in the first place.
2. The erection of the statue was not a sincere expression of faith, but a spiteful trolling exercise purely intended to distress Christians. It was a display of prejudice against Christians and targeted harassment of them.
3. Satanism is, by Christian definition, evil, and Christians have no responsibility to tolerate evil. God’s law takes precedent over the laws of mankind, including the constitution.

There’s a certain point at which we need some adults in the room to tell people what … liberal, democratic values are; what their value is; why we uphold them; what they’re good for; and they need to stand up for these values or we are going to further degenerate in our polarism towards autocracy.

My Observations and Response as an Iowan, State Representative, and Pastor. My response as a follower of Christ…

Satan has no place in our society and should not be recognized as a “religion” by the federal government. I’ll chip in to contribute to this veteran's legal defense fund. Good prevails over evil—that’s the American spirit.

For if according to the Law we begin all of us to render evil for evil, we shall all become evil, since they that do hurt abound. But if according to Christ we resist not evil, though they that are evil be not amended, yet they that are good remain good. ~John Chrysostom

The Lord then, the Physician of souls, teaches His disciples to endure with patience the sicknesses of those for whose spiritual health they should provide. For all wickedness comes of a sickness of the mind; nothing is more innocent than he who is sound and of perfect health in virtue. ~Augustine of Hippo

Disestablishment of the Church of England Bill has first reading in Parliament

The Disestablishment of the Church of England Bill had its first reading in the UK Parliament today. The Bill, if enacted, would disestablis

Humanists UK

‘Humanists UK welcomes the introduction of this Bill. In a modern, diverse society, it’s crucial to separate religion from state, allowing for genuine equality of all religions and beliefs. Disestablishment would mark a crucial step towards a fairer, secular state, ensuring that public institutions remain neutral and inclusive.’

Finally, New Rule: Praise Jesus, it's a Christmas miracle. For the first time in the 21 year history of this show we are on in December, which gives me a chance to explain to everyone something I've always wanted to expound upon in this show.

You know that whole thing about Jesus being born on December 25th? Well it's a crock of shit. Now, this is not an attack on Jesus. Although, he was a nepo baby. But also a revolutionary philosopher with a beautiful message. As to whether he's a God, that's up to you.

But if the subject is "Gods born on December 25th," we have enough of those for an entire Jeopardy category.

He was the Egyptian god who took the form of a falcon. Who is Horus?

He is the god from ancient Persia born bearing a torch. Who is Mithra?

He is the Greek god of rebirth. Who is Adonis?

He was the fertility god in Cleopatra's time. Who is Osiris?

This Greek deity was known for having a good time. Who is Dionysis?

So you may be asking - those are all real by the way, I think that was the problem, they think I'm making this up but I'm not - why do all the gods want the same birthday? Well, because December 25th was a pagan holiday coming a few days after the shortest day of the year, when primitive peoples noticed that the days were starting to get longer again, and so a cause for celebration.

Cut to:

And that's the story of Christmas. A holiday I love by the way. The tree, the presents, the music, the Christmas memories with my sister and our cousins filling the bong with eggnog. It's the only time of the year it's okay to put alcohol in milk. Christmas is fun if you just accept it's pretend time. Like a Hollywood wedding.

Yes, I love Christmas and always have. Just don't try to make me take it seriously.

And that is what has been going on a lot lately here in America. We have a new Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson, who says America is actually a Biblical Republic and that he's even got a flag picked out that hangs outside his office, and which also could be seen in the mob on January 6th. Mike also says, "the separation of church and state is a misnomer," and congresswoman Lauren Boebert concurs saying she's, "tired of this separation of church and state junk." So too Marjorie Taylor Green, who says, "I say it proudly, we should all be Christian nationalists."

Now I know it may seem like this is just a few crazies, but I gotta tell you, dumbass Republicans who believe horrible ideas are like ants: there's always more that you can't see.

And in in fact, these ideas are no longer the fringe. According to a recent survey, over half of Republicans are either adherents of Christian nationalism or sympathetic to it. And they agree with statements like: "The US government should declare America a Christian Nation," and "Being Christian is an important part of being truly American," and "God has called Christians to exercise dominion over all areas of American society."

I'm sorry but I don't want anyone exercising their dominion over me unless I pay them and we've established a safe-word.

Boebert says, "The church is supposed to direct the government. The government is not supposed to direct the church." Well, no and no. Neither one is supposed to direct the other. That's what separation of church and state means.

Republicans, Jesus fucking Christ. First you stop believing in democracy - Senator Mike Lee said it, among others. Trump lives the idea every day, and here we have the Speaker of the House saying it. And now Republicans also don't believe in the separation of church and state? Does anyone in that party remember what fucking country you're living in?

We're the place that stakes so much of our greatness on being the first to specifically prohibit having a state religion. There are dozens of countries that have an official religion. There's 13 where being an atheist is punishable by death. Four have "Islamic" right in the title of the country.

And maybe that warms the hearts of the TikTok crowd who lately have found heroes in Hamas and Osama Bin Laden. But that's not us. That's not what we do here. I get it you kids like to switch things up. But I can only handle one side at a time being ridiculous about religious fanaticism, and right now I've got my hands full with Mike Johnson.

Because Mike Johnson has the power to actually make laws. And I don't want my global warming policy decided by someone who is rooting for the end of the world so we can get on with the Rapture. And who once filed a legal brief before the Supreme Court arguing that what he called "deviant same sex intercourse" should be a crime. Even the lesbian stuff?

Mike thinks God personally chooses, raises up our leaders, which is a very dangerous thought, because then when you lose an election you think it's just another of God's tricks to test your faith. Like fossils. Mike says, "We began as a Christian nation." We didn't. Did you miss that day in home school, Mike? If you don't know that the pilgrims came here to get away from the Church of England then you don't know, literally, the first thing about our country. Mike says, being a Christian nation is, "our tradition," and, "it's who we are as a people."

It's not. We're the people who have a First Amendment which says, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion." And we have an Article Six which says, "no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office."

So, I take these people at their word when they say that they think we should be Christian nationalists. But then they have to take John Adams at his word when he wrote, "the government of the United States of America is not an any sense founded on the Christian religion."

But I still love Christmas!

Introduction The rising influence of Christian nationalism in some segments of American politics poses a major threat to the health of our democracy. Increasingly, the major battle lines of the culture war are being drawn between a right animated by a Christian nationalist worldview and Americans who embrace the country’s growing racial and religious diversity. This new PRRI/Brookings survey of more than 6,000 Americans takes a closer look at the underpinnings of Christian nationalism, providing new measures to estimate the proportion of Americans who adhere to and reject Christian nationalist ideology. The survey also examines how Christian nationalist views intersect with white identity, anti-Black sentiment, support of patriarchy, antisemitism, anti-Muslim sentiments, anti-immigrant attitudes, authoritarianism, and support for violence. Additionally, the survey explores the influence Christian nationalism has within our two primary political parties and major religious subgroups and what this reveals about the state of American democracy and the health of our society.

“The thing about your religion is that it’s your religion, not mine.”

-- John Iadarola

“The separation of church and state is important to me because it protects the rights of both non-religious and religious people. The same wall that protects atheists from state spon.sored Christianity is the one that protects Christians from state spon.sored Islam.”

-- Amanda Scott

“The divorce between Church and State ought to be absolute. It ought to be so absolute that no Church property anywhere, in any state or in the nation, should be exempt from equal taxation; for if you exempt the property of any church organization, to that extent you impose a tax upon the whole community.”

-- President James A. Garfield

“An infinite god ought to be able to protect himself, without going in partnership with State Legislatures.”

-- Robert G. Ingersoll

"Religion doesn't appear too harmful when it is muzzled by a rational, secular society, but should you make the dangerous mistake of allowing it to govern, you'll be granted front row seats to see its true insanity shine."

-- Michael A. Sherlock

“Religious freedom means that you can practice any religion you want. It doesn't mean you can use YOUR beliefs to dictate what others can and cannot do. Your religion guides you, not all of us.”

Executive Summary — U.S. Secular Survey | Largest Study of Non-religious Americans

www.secularsurvey.org

In the small city I am from, religion is a way of life, and anyone who comes along who doesn’t toe the line is scary, and when people fear you unjustly, they can justify doing horrible things to you. It’s scary to be an atheist in a small town. We need more groups to not just be activists on the big issues, but we need to teach people how to be community leaders and provide tangible services to people. We need to teach them how to build safe communities that people can turn to when they lose everything after leaving religion. We need more groups that serve the emotional needs of the nonreligious in their community, that are helping on a local and individual scale.

— Female, Texas

Black participants were 1/2 as likely to have supportive parents and 3x as likely to be physically assaulted.

Ex-Muslim participants were 2x as likely to experience negative interactions with police and court systems.

Among nonreligious servicemembers and veterans, nearly 1/2 had negative experiences during their service.

Young people were 5x as likely to be physically assaulted 3x as likely to be depressed.

“The purpose of separation of church and state is to keep forever from these shores the ceaseless strife that has soaked the soil of Europe with blood for centuries.”

-- James Madison

AP: Catholic Church lobbied for taxpayer funds, got $1.4B

apnews.com

NEW YORK (AP) — The U.S. Roman Catholic Church used a special and unprecedented exemption from federal rules to amass at least $1.4 billion in taxpayer-backed coronavirus aid, with many millions going to dioceses that have paid huge settlements or sought bankruptcy protection because of clergy sexual abuse cover-ups.

The church’s haul may have reached -- or even exceeded -- $3.5 billion, making a global religious institution with more than a billion followers among the biggest winners in the U.S. government’s pandemic relief efforts, an Associated Press analysis of federal data released this week found.

Houses of worship and faith-based organizations that promote religious beliefs aren’t usually eligible for money from the U.S. Small Business Administration. But as the economy plummeted and jobless rates soared, Congress let faith groups and other nonprofits tap into the Paycheck Protection Program, a $659 billion fund created to keep Main Street open and Americans employed.

By aggressively promoting the payroll program and marshaling resources to help affiliates navigate its shifting rules, Catholic dioceses, parishes, schools and other ministries have so far received approval for at least 3,500 forgivable loans, AP found.

The Archdiocese of New York, for example, received 15 loans worth at least $28 million just for its top executive offices. Its iconic St. Patrick’s Cathedral on Fifth Avenue was approved for at least $1 million.

In Orange County, California, where a sparkling glass cathedral estimated to cost over $70 million recently opened, diocesan officials working at the complex received four loans worth at least $3 million.

And elsewhere, a loan of at least $2 million went to the diocese covering Wheeling-Charleston, West Virginia, where a church investigation revealed last year that then-Bishop Michael Bransfield embezzled funds and made sexual advances toward young priests.