The Grand Illusion
Both Donald Trump and J.D. Vance have been playing the “Christian nation” card every chance they get lately, emphasizing the idea that the United Sates was established as a Christian nation.
That contention is inaccurate. In fact, it’s dead wrong. While the majority of the Founding Fathers were “Christian” in background, the vast majority insisted on keeping religion out of government, as demonstrated by their support of the First Amendment to the Constitution.
All of the Founding Fathers had experienced or seen the abuse created by state religions or state-supported religions, and not just in England or elsewhere in Europe, and even in the American colonies. Nine of the thirteen original colonies authorized established churches – the Congregational Church in New England and the Anglican Church in the middle and southern colonies – with the result that personal freedoms were restricted.
In the 1700s in colonial Virginia, government legally and financially supported the Anglican Church and opposed other faiths, including other Christian denominations. Preachers without a license from the Anglican Church faced fines, jail, and physical punishment (whipping). Quakers were forced to move to Maryland. New York excluded Catholics from guarantees of the liberty of conscience. In the late 1600s and early 1700s, the Maryland government adopted laws depriving Catholics of their previously held civil rights and ultimately established the Church of England as the only authorized faith. Jews were denied voting rights in most colonies.
Today, even fewer Americans think of themselves as “Christian.” According to Pew Research Center surveys conducted since 2020, the “Christian” share of the adult population has been between 60% and 64%, while the religiously unaffiliated share has ranged from 28% to 31%. Adherents of religions other than Christianity have consistently accounted for 6% or 7% of U.S. adults.
Given the shift in the belief structure of Americans, and the prohibition of religious interference in government enshrined in the Constitution, why are Trump and Vance pushing the idea of a Christian nation?
Might it just be to obtain political support for a religious authoritarian state? The Founding Fathers would have been appalled, as most Americans should be today.
Thomas Paine would be appalled.
I have the Freedom From Religion Foundation appropriately bookmarked. Have for some time now. Loved their commercial with Ron Reagan in it where he states,
“I’m Ron Reagan, lifelong atheist, not afraid of burning in hell…”
Thoughtful and very very funny.
(career scientist and also atheist myself)
But you know, nearly every SciFi author eventually touches on religion in future worlds. It seems to me that modern man is hard wired to believe in a supreme being – unfortunately. Maybe LEM might comment on that?
Most people, throughout history, appear to be wired or at least predisposed to believe in a greater power.
Almost necessarily, that can be neither proved or disproved. That doesn’t make it an attempt to avoid science – which sometimes is itself prone to becoming more ideology than science (the Soviets were notorious for that, but we’ve had our own issues there, if not quite so ideologically driven; anything that MUST NOT be questioned or must be prematurely declared misinformation is very problematic).
It does mean there is conceptual ground which neither faith nor science can presently take from the other. There are too many occurrences that have no present scientific explanation and don’t lend themselves to recreation in the laboratory, but can’t simply be assumed to be delusional. Given that science doesn’t purport to know everything, there is much yet to be learned, that may eventually be a matter of either faith or science but isn’t absolutely either yet.
At least in fiction, you seem ok with that – a fair bit of prophecy, even if necessarily not really understood until fulfilled. But the only speculative basis for how prophecy might be possible starts to sound a lot like theology (as does some more extreme theoretical physics).
With Trump and Vance for examples, who’d want to be a Christian?
Upon hearing of a pastor running for political office, a friend once said that would be a big step down.
That’s IMO true of most politicians of all parties. I trust the beliefs they demonstrate by quiet conduct outside of politics far more than those they talk about. Trump simply doesn’t have a filter on his outside voice or some of his actions.
But there are absolutely counter-arguments to the notion that everything for him is about him and his own power. If you think that, you’ve fallen for the act, and will be distracted when he actually does something he said he’d do.
Illegal migration shut down. NATO upping their defense spending to 5%. Both have been talked about for decades with no results until someone with zero statecraft holding them back came along.
While I agree with your point about Trump getting NATO to contribute more for defense, you’re swallowing the Trump Kool Aid on immigration.
Bill Clinton deported 12.3 million illegal immigrants, George W. Bush 10.3 million, and Barack Obama 5.3 million in their eight-year administrations. Even Joe Biden racked up 4 million. Trump’s first term? 1.9 million, and another 605,000 for 2025 (according to DHS in mid-December). In addition, Trump’s focus on “numbers” has resulted in an increasing number of arrests of non-criminals. The Washington Post reviewed the data recently and found that on average, 7 percent of ICE arrests between early 2019 and the beginning of 2025 were non-criminals, while for this past year that figure was at 23 percent. Not only that, but the number and percentage of criminals deported and/or prosecuted has dropped, despite the massive increase in DHS funding.
They were mostly anti-sectarian (although it was some time AFTER the Bill of Rights before state level denominations went away, but the favoritism to them in their waning days was more symbolic than substantial). After all, most of the European “religious” conflicts were a matter of the official sect of Christianity in a country vs other sects. And Pennsylvania being a refuge for those of alternative sects predated the Bill of Rights by nearly a century, given its founder (William Penn, a Quaker who was well enough connected to get a royal charter despite not being Anglican).
But I suspect that aside from deists or agnostics, they’d have viewed anything other than some flavor of Christianity, or hopefully Judaism too, as at least culturally problematic, if not enough so to ban. The Barbary Pirates were arguably an example of problematic differences (and against which there was no declaration of war despite their having declared war against us, although there was an authorization to use force).
Using history to argue precedent for how things should be now is rarely as clear cut as either/any side would like to make it.
I’m skeptical of “Christian Nationalism” _not_ because I have a problem with a non-authoritarian version of some of its objectives or with either of its components (although neither is immune to abuse; and demonstrably no organized belief has ever been granted divine protection against corruption, save perhaps at the level of the individual committed to avoiding corruption…which is promised), but rather because the brilliant Christian apologist C.S. Lewis warned against “Christianity and (whatever)”, as (to oversimplify) the Christian practice and principles would become quickly neglected in favor of the cause, be it liberation theology, Christian Nationalism, Christian environmentalism (yeah, that exists), etc. So while I don’t despise politicians speaking in favor of Christianity, I’d sooner they did a better job of practicing it personally rather than talking about it. And I’ve seen a deep and sincere local church become damaging by the pursuit of political power by some of its leaders. The people should have known better…