Real Life Religion

     The general conversation about religion and politics is how much they should intertwine. The conversation isn’t usually about how similar the two are. They both have very personal aspects, but more importantly they are both systematic things in American society. They both have the power to bring large groups of people together and have a lot of influence. They even have the power to break groups apart and create us-vs-them mentalities. Politics and religion are integral to what America is, whether we like it or not. 

     An article by the Atlantic elaborates on this idea. It starts out with a fairly common notion that the amount of non-religious Americans is growing. The article cites a study saying that Atheists, Agnostic, and non-affiliated take up about 25% of the population. My last post discussed people’s ideas of changing statistics and whether people think it is a good or bad thing. That is a valid discussion to have, but it doesn’t change that it is happening. So that begs the question: What happens next?

     If you are Noah Feldman, a Harvard law professor who studies the interactions between religion and politics, the answer to that question is war. Feldman explains how both concepts are a “technology,” or a way of controlling people. This statement seems generally correct, but he doesn’t really support that statement. He basically goes on to say that this war was caused by 9/11, and therefore Islam. Feldman explains that even though Islam and Democracy are concepts that might mean different things for different people, most believe that they cannot exist together. He says, “within the sphere of people who have that view, and it’s a large number of people in the Muslim world who disagree with bin Laden in his application, but agree that Islam is the answer.” He says this war is inevitable, and states that Americans are most likely to react with fear and/or generalization. 

     I feel like Feldman had some interesting things to say, but it was honestly one of the worst TED Talks I’ve ever seen. He came off as a bit Islamophobic to me, which surprised me coming from TED, not to mention a Hardvard educator. It is difficult for me to have an analytical response to his ideas, but I do think he has a point with religion and politics being a “technology.” 

     I think the Atlantic article explained this in a clearer, less Islamophobic, way. In a way, religion and politics are a technology, but they aren’t technologies purely to control people. They are systems that bring people together or separate people. In other words, they create identity. The article claims that humans need some “ultimate loyalty” to survive. The article explains that during the Obama presidency, politics were fairly tame, especially compared to the Middle East. As Trump’s era began, politics became more polarized and fragmented. This threatened the concept of American identity. We moved from a period of general agreement of ideals to two sides claiming they are following true American ideals. It notes how “un-American” is used quite often by many groups in America, but not many countries have something like that. The author relates it to the concept of heresy.

     That brings us to the article’s next point. Religion in America works the same way. Though never officially a religious country, faith has been an integral part of what is considered American. As citizens shift from a general agreement of faith to a wider variety of belief (or lack thereof) the same polarization will happen. The conversation becomes an argument of who is being American the “right” way. This article highlights that without these uniting ideas, we don’t have anything to fall back on. It does just leave the conversation there though. It also notes that when Americans have an overarching idea of identity, that often leads to nationalistic feelings. I think this is a really interesting, and sort of depressing, thing to bring up. It seems like no matter what, there is always an idea of this “other” that is doing something wrong.

     It amazes me that an article and a TED Talk with such a similar thesis handle their presentation of ideas in such different ways. This is one of those topics where I can just think about it and not really come to any sort of conclusion. It feels like such a new situation and has so much deep-rooted history behind it that it feels too complex to address. 

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2021/04/america-politics-religion/618072/

 

     I have been interested in religion since I can remember. It has been part of my life for a long time. I look forward to deep conversations with my dad about the nature of the world and sharing interesting facts we find. I remember my mom trying to explain biblical stories in a less terrifying way after my very passionate gramma told me about hell. I love researching any religion and trying to understand the ways they interact with other parts of life.

     As I grow older, I have become more aware of how religion interacts with politics. Religion is still a daily part of life, but not always willingly or in the name of understanding. Now, I see politicians using religion as a tool or weapon, a way of separating “us” and “them.” When I turn on the news or open Facebook I am flooded with arguments about religion’s place in America. It isn’t just about religion, but specifically Christianity.

     I find myself in a difficult spot. As someone who loves learning about religion and appreciates what it is, I can’t imagine a fully secular government. I fear the situation in France where they ban any visual sign of religion in public schools in the name of secularism. On the other hand, I see what happens when religion and politics intermingle. I have experienced the fear of not being able to get married one day or not being able to choose the fate of my body. 

     In a national sense, people have very polar views about religion’s place in America’s government. For this blog post, I wanted to read one conservative article and one liberal article to get a broader understanding of what is going on.

     The first article I read was from “The New Republic”, a group generally associated with the left. The article was called, “The Rise of Spirit Warriors on the Christian Right. The first thing you see upon opening the article is a huge depiction of a suit-wearing man with a snake tongue holding a sword and a Bible. He is above a yelling crowd of people holding American flags with crosses fixed at the top. The picture reminds me of the classic style of Communist propaganda that is so often satirized. That being said, this is not something I expected in a left-leaning non-satirical article.

     The article itself doesn’t really fit the tone that the opening picture sets. It explains how America has gone through phases of change in its relationship with religion and that we are currently going through one of those phases. Modern media seems to focus on the rise of those who don’t particularly identify with any religion but misses the change in those who do identify with religion. The article says that religious people are becoming “hotter and more reactionary” and are a threat to democracy. It cites examples of this from extremist groups like the New Apostolic Reformation to more famous politicians like Ron DeSantis. I think the most telling example of this is DeSantis quoting the Bible in a speech and switching the word “devil” to “the left.”

    The article goes on to explain that the rise in “spiritual warfare” is due to a growing popularity of Pentecostalism. That is a subsection of Christianity that focuses more on the present battle of good and evil rather than the afterlife. Despite this, the article reinforces that these beliefs are deeper than any one event, person, or religion, and to truly protect democracy we need to understand that.

     The supposedly more conservative article, “Russell D. Moore: A Podcast on Religion on Politics” from the “National Review,” really interested me. The article states, “Many people say that religion is a threat to politics. It’s also true that politics is a threat to religion.” Moore criticizes the hypocrisy of politicians and followers that try to use religion to gain support and recognizes that authoritarian governments use either the promoting or banning of religion to take control. I didn’t expect this article to imply that religion is indeed a threat to democracy, let alone critique “religious” politicians and their followers.

     I think reading these two articles made me realize something. Extremism is the problem. I was stuck in a cycle of all-or-nothing, but that didn’t lead me anywhere. I don’t think anything should be banned in the name of religion, of course, but that doesn’t seem to be the only thing that the conversation is about. These articles are talking more about the people who use religion to get power, and not necessarily what they are doing with it.

https://newrepublic.com/article/170027/rise-spirit-warriors-christian-right-politics

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/religion-and-politics-a-bloody-crossroads/

https://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/en/coming-to-france/france-facts/secularism-and-religious-freedom-in-france-63815/article/secularism-and-religious-freedom-in-france