Freedom to Believe

One week out from the election, I’ve been replacing my usual political podcast rotation (which I listen to when doing mindless chores like yardwork or chopping vegetables) with what I’m viewing as “root cause exploration” podcasts. The explanations I’m looking for: Why did a majority of our citizenry choose an impaired, incompetent, cruel, criminal, authoritarian con man to be the leader of our nation over a candidate with the exact opposite traits?

I don’t buy that somehow the Democrats didn’t convey enough or the right types of messages in their campaign, that they somehow didn’t reach enough of the right people. The contrasting candidate visions were clear to see for anyone looking for them. But in the end, enough people chose to ignore all the reasons the currently elected leader is a devastatingly horrific choice for the present and for the future of our nation. Why?

Of course, a significant chunk of the electorate wouldn’t agree with that last statement. For White Christian Nationalism advocates, Trump has offered a future vision of our country they would very much like to see become a reality. But White Christian Nationalists have always served as the backbone of Trump’s support. So, another question is: Who provided the extra support this time?

Early reports indicate an increase in Evangelist, Catholic, and Protestant support for Trump across both White and Hispanic believers. But even with increased religious support, it seems unlikely religious reasons alone accounted for all of Trump’s support this year. Early results suggest other factors to consider as well. However, I decided to first focus on White Christian Nationalism, as it’s been such a prominent and enduring factor, in my pursuit of understanding the nature of Trump’s support.

To begin, I would like to assert that White Christian Nationalist visionaries who advocate for a White Christian Nationalist-centric government and nation are just plain arrogantly misguided. The constitutional freedom to practice one’s religion, a right all citizens are entitled to, does not include the freedom to impose one’s religious beliefs onto others. Religious freedom occurs within the hearts and minds of individuals and within their homes and their churches, not within the public square. And that’s simply because not all citizens, to whom the public square belongs, subscribe to the same religion – they never have and they never will. As a nation of immigrants holding a variety of religious beliefs from the start, we were never meant to be a nation guided by or promoting one particular religion.

While I am confident that White Christian Nationalism is not an accurate reflection of what our country is meant to be, how does that help us move forward? We’re not going to change hearts and minds by somehow forcing White Christian Nationalists to “see the light.” That’s what makes this so hard. These are ingrained beliefs – and long-held beliefs. The underlying belief in White Christian superiority has existed for centuries. It’s always been present and mostly taken for granted in our country. Increasing acceptance of multiculturalism in recent decades has threatened that assumed superiority, causing a growing and misguided movement towards “returning” our nation to its supposed founding White European religious roots.

Changing hearts and minds is a tall task when people fear they will lose something important to them. But that illustrates the key point. No one will lose their religious freedom if we strive towards accepting and respecting all religions; they will only lose their illusion that religious freedom includes imposing one’s religious views on others via government action and policy.

Action Items:

• Understanding and conveying the history of and true meaning of religious freedom in our country
• Opposing all government actions and policies that favor or alienate specific religions
• Promoting better understanding between religions (as people get to know others with different religious beliefs, including non-believers, they’ll see we have much more in common than we have differences)