Trump and SCOTUS are Dismantling Church-State Separation. Learn how to fight back on 8/11 at 1:00 - 2:15 pm ET
RegisterPluralism has long been a hallmark of American democracy. Our national commitment to diversity is reflected in our constitutional values. The First Amendment ensures we are all free to believe as we choose, without fear of discrimination or harm. These protections are necessary to ensure religion and democracy thrive.
Instead of safeguarding our national diversity, the Religious Right has sought to distort the meaning of religious freedom to enshrine their beliefs into law and favor a very narrow worldview. In recent years, this radical minority has grown increasingly vocal and visible. Politicians on the Religious Right continue to use hateful rhetoric to try and pit Americans of different backgrounds against each other. These politicians would have Americans reject pluralism in favor of a Christian national identity.
The Religious Right characterizes Christianity as central to American identity. Even though this has gained traction among those on the Religious Right, new polling reveals that it has not been embraced by Americans as a whole.
Our communities and country are enriched by religious and cultural diversity. Despite growing political divisions, overall an increasing number of Americans are embracing pluralism. About two-thirds of Americans (65%) say that the fact that “the United States has a diverse population, with people of many different races, ethnicities, religions, and backgrounds,” makes the country stronger, including 40% who say it makes the country much stronger. This includes majorities of all religious groups. A majority of Americans also say that in general, immigrants and newcomers strengthen American society.
Though there are divides along partisan and religious lines for preference for religious diversity, overall Americans demonstrate a preference for religious pluralism. A shrinking minority of Americans believe that being Christian is somewhat or very important to being truly American (43%, substantially down from 53% in 2015).
Finally, three in four Americans (75%) agree with the statement “It is still possible for the U.S. to achieve the ideal of our national motto ‘E Pluribus Unum’: ‘From many people, one,’” compared to 22% who disagree. Across various demographics, solid majorities agree with this statement, including party, religious affiliation, race, education, gender, region, and area of residence.
Attempts by the Religious Right to undermine our democracy should be taken seriously. But their radical views do not represent the opinions of the majority of Americans. Pluralism is still valued by Americans across demographics. An inclusive vision of religious freedom protects our national diversity, and enables all of us to thrive.
Learn about Interfaith Alliance’s efforts to advance true religious freedom.
In early July, Ayman Soliman, a former Cincinnati Children’s Hospital chaplain, was detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) after his asylum status was terminated in June. In response, local faith leaders organized a prayer vigil, rally, and peaceful march; during the march at least 15 protesters were detained by local police and charged with felony rioting.
In a recently published article in the Cambridge Journal of Political Affairs, Adam Hamdan offers a statistical analysis of the role religion plays in Supreme Court cases. The article builds on previous studies examining the interplay between religious beliefs and Supreme Court cases to find that under the Roberts Court, the Supreme Court has sided with religious groups more than previous courts, especially when it comes to Christian groups. This finding mirrors public perception of the Supreme Court, as a recent PEW Research Center study found that 35% of Americans see SCOTUS as friendly toward religion, a significant increase from the 18% of Americans that believed that in 2019.
On July 12, Speaker of the House Mike Johnson posted an article on X titled “The True Meaning of ‘The Separation of Church and State.’” In it, Speaker Johnson argues that the original intent of the “separation of church and state” doctrine was to allow religious groups to influence the government while protecting them from government regulation.