How has the role of Christianity in American politics showed itself in an overt way during the 21st century? What is one negative instance and one positive instance?

The role that Christianity has played in US politics over the past few decades has been one of shifting factions and alignments. While religion and politics have rarely, if ever, been fully separated, the development of the Moral Majority in 1979 marked a new sort of explicit connection, making a vocal conservative base for the Republican party and bringing certain issues to the front of public conversation.
While the Moral Majority ended around the close of Ronald Reagan's presidency, it helped to establish a new model for the way religious leaders could influence politics. Our contemporary period does not see a group with quite the prominence, but the close ties between religious leaders like Jerry Falwell, Jr., and the GOP continue.
On the other side, politically liberal religious thinkers have organized, too. A group like Sojourners, led by Jim Wallis, helps organize thinking on the left, particularly around social justice issues. After the election of President Trump, a rift in Christianity became recognizable, and factions on both sides have become entrenched in their positions on issues such as immigration, abortion, and gay marriage (though we should recognize that people do not always split along party or denominational lines on these topics).
Finding the negative and positive instances of Christianity's changing role in US politics would likely be personal. Some may find the very presence of faith in political dialogue to be unappealing, while others would find it quite welcome. Some scholars suggest that the increased hostility among religious leaders in public has contributed to the rise of Millennials identifying as “nones,” or having no religious affiliation. Religious voices have always contributed to politics (think of the Civil Rights Movement, for one obvious example), and we now see that happening in new areas. Whether that pushes the separation of church or state or offers just voices into delicate conversation remains its own topic for debate.


The role of religion in American politics in general has evolved considerably over the last several decades, with the rise in influence of Christian evangelicals during the Reagan Administration the most obvious development. Christianity’s role since then has depended to a large degree on the role of the Republican Party in presidential administrations. In short, the influence of Christianity has varied depending upon which major party controlled the Executive Branch of government. In the 21st century, the role of Americans who identify as Christian has not been noticeably increased or diminished.  While many Christians, but by no means all, support or oppose various policies based upon their religious beliefs, the overt role of Christianity has remained largely constant.
The peak of Christian evangelical influence referenced above provided the public with a number of names of individuals who became known for the perception of political influence they supposedly, or actually, wielded. Pastors and others like Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, Ralph Reed and a number of others are no longer household names, admired or reviled depending upon one’s view of reproductive rights or U.S. foreign policy. During the 1980s, communism and abortion united many evangelicals on the political right and, whereas the abortion issue remains highly divisive, the role of Christianity is not as influential as it once was.
Today, in the early decades of the 21st century, Christianity’s role in American politics is harder to define. While the abortion issue remains closely tied to religious beliefs, communism is no longer a major part of political discourse. What has, however, made Christianity’s role in politics markedly different in the present era is immigration policy. African American and Hispanic American Christian leaders in particular have been vocal opponents of President Trump’s pledge to fight illegal immigration and to more carefully screen immigrants and visitors from Muslim-majority countries. For the most part, however, most white Evangelical leaders continue to support Republican policies with regard to abortion, Islam, and fundamental questions of the line between religion and politics in the United States.  The latter issue has been the most recent to see a resurgence of Christian support from the right side of the political spectrum. President Trump’s recent Executive Order addressing the issue of religious freedom was intended to reverse what his supporters view as a trend in the United States towards intolerance with regard to Christianity in public institutions. Section 2 of the Order states, as follows:

"Respecting Religious and Political Speech.  All executive departments and agencies (agencies) shall, to the greatest extent practicable and to the extent permitted by law, respect and protect the freedom of persons and organizations to engage in religious and political speech."

The effects of President Trump’s Executive Order remains to be seen, but, symbolically, it represents a major political victory for the Christian Right.
The student’s question requests one negative and one positive aspect of the role of Christianity in American politics. Only the individual student can respond to that assignment. One’s views on individual issues like abortion and the separation of church and state will dictate whether the student in question views the role of Christianity, or religion in general, in positive or negative terms depending upon those specific issues. If you believe that public schools should allow prayer in classrooms, then you will likely view the recent Executive Order in a positive light. If you believe there should be a right to an abortion, then your views of the role of the Evangelical community might swing to the left. Only the student posting the question can answer.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/05/04/presidential-executive-order-promoting-free-speech-and-religious-liberty
https://www.nae.net/evangelicals-and-politics/

https://www.pewresearch.org/2006/04/25/attitudes-toward-immigration-in-the-pulpit-and-the-pew/

https://www.upi.com/Top_News/Opinion/2016/10/28/How-a-new-generation-is-changing-evangelical-Christianity/6571477671203/

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Single Variable Calculus, Chapter 3, 3.6, Section 3.6, Problem 34

Determine $y''$ of $\sqrt{x} + \sqrt{y} = 1$ by using implicit differentiation. Solving for 1st Derivative $ \begin{equation} \begin{aligned} \frac{d}{dx} (\sqrt{x}) + \frac{d}{dx} (\sqrt{y}) =& \frac{d}{dx} (1) \\ \\ \frac{d}{dx} (x)^{\frac{1}{2}} + \frac{d}{dx} (y)^{\frac{1}{2}} =& \frac{d}{dx} (1) \\ \\ \frac{1}{2} (x)^{\frac{-1}{2}} + \frac{1}{2} (y)^{\frac{-1}{2}} \frac{d}{dx} =& 0 \\ \\ \frac{1}{2 (y)^{\frac{1}{2}}} \frac{dy}{dx} =& \frac{-1}{2(x)^{\frac{1}{2}}} \\ \\ \frac{dy}{dx} =& - \frac{\cancel{2} (y)^{\frac{1}{2}}}{\cancel{2}(x)^{\frac{1}{2}}} \\ \\ \frac{dy}{dx} =& - \frac{(y)^{\frac{1}{2}}}{(x)^{\frac{1}{2}}} \end{aligned} \end{equation} $ Solving for 2nd Derivative $ \begin{equation} \begin{aligned} \frac{d^2 y}{dx^2} =& - \frac{\displaystyle (x)^{\frac{1}{2}} \frac{d}{dx}(y)^{\frac{1}{2}} - (y)^{\frac{1}{2}} \frac{d}{dx} (x)^{\frac{1}{2}} }{[(x)^{\frac{1}{2}}]^2} \\ \\ \\ \\ \frac{d^2 y}{dx^2} =& - \frac{\displaystyle (x)^{\frac{...
Read more

In “Fahrenheit 451,” what does Faber mean by “Those who don’t build must burn. It’s as old as history and juvenile delinquents”?

During a conversation between Montag and Faber, Faber says, "Those who don't build must burn. It's as old as history and juvenile delinquents" (Bradbury, 42). Faber is saying that those individuals who do not positively contribute to society are helping to destroy it. Faber's analogy corresponds to the function of the firefighters, who destroy books and prevent individuals from attaining knowledge. Montag, who is a jaded firefighter, feels extremely guilty about participating in the destruction of society. He visits Faber in hopes of altering the trajectory of his life and wishes to contribute to society instead of being a destructive force. Faber believes that authors, artists, and intellectuals "build" institutions and have an overall positive impact on society. According to Faber's views, individuals who do not give back to society either directly or indirectly contribute to its destruction, which explains his own feelings of guilt. While Faber do...
Read more

What was the effect of World War II on African Americans?

According to historians John Hope Franklin and Alfred A. Moss, Jr., more than three million black men registered for the Selective Service. However, they were refused at a rate of 18.2 percent, compared to just 8.5 percent for whites.  Discrimination was rampant in the armed forces, though black soldiers had more opportunities than in the First World War. They were included in the infantry, the coast and field artillery, the engineer corps, the medical corps, and many other branches. When the Women's Army Corps was organized (WAC), black women were included. By the end of the war, more than 4,000 women had enlisted in the organization. The next step was to get black soldiers recommended for advanced training at officer training schools. Blacks were not admitted to officer training schools in high numbers until the Secretary of War issued an order stating that blacks were to be admitted. The integration of the military began in 1945, first on the war front in Germany. In 1948, sever...
Read more