Respecting Religion

It's been three years since the launch of the Christians Against Christian Nationalism initiative. In this episode, Amanda and Holly discuss what we've learned since convening that project and how the conversation is changing today. They share about accusations we've heard over the project's lifetime, why we are seeing this topic in the media more often, and the odd ways the public discourse is shifting. SHOW NOTES: Segment one (starting at 00:47): A brief history of Christians Against Christian Nationalism Prior episodes of this podcast series discussing Christian nationalism include: S3, Ep. 19: Gun culture and Christian nationalism in America (June 16, 2022) S3, Ep. 18: Christian nationalism and election season 2022 (June 2, 2022) S3, Ep. 12: Christian nationalism and January 6 (Feb. 17, 2022) S1, Ep. 11: Christian nationalism during the coronavirus pandemic (April 30, 2020) Read and sign the Christians Against Christian Nationalism statement at ChristiansAgainstChristianNationalism.org. Visit this link for the Christians Against Christian Nationalism library of resources including: Our 2019 podcast series on the dangers of Christian nationalism and corresponding discussion guide One-page explainer on Christian nationalism Frequently Asked Questions Visit BJC's YouTube channel for a playlist of videos addressing frequently asked questions, including: What is Christian Nationalism, and how is it different from Christianity? Is the United States a "Christian nation"? Read the joint report from BJC and the Freedom From Religion Foundation on Christian nationalism and the January 6 insurrection at this link. Visit BJC's library of resources at BJConline.org/christian-nationalism Segment two (starting at 11:40): Where are we now in the battle against Christian nationalism? We played two clips from members of Congress: Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene in a panel discussion at CPAC Texas 2022 Rep. Lauren Boebert speaking at Cornerstone Christian Center in Basalt, Colorado The joint AP / PBS Frontline investigation on the rise of Gen. Michael Flynn and the ReAwaken America tour includes this article by Michelle Smith and Richard Lardner: "Michael Flynn's ReAwaken road show recruits 'Army of God'" The PBS Frontline Special titled "Michael Flynn's Holy War" is available at this link. Read Amanda's op-ed for CNN.com: Marjorie Taylor Greene's words on Christian nationalism are a wake-up call As mentioned, Amanda has been on several programs recently discussing Christian nationalism. Here are a few: Up Front, a program on Al Jazeera English Ayman, a program on MSNBC on Peacock Reality Check with John Avlon, a program on CNN Segment three (starting at 27:04): Lessons learned as we continue the cause Amanda was interviewed for this article in Texas Monthly by Bekah McNeel: Decoding the Christian Language of Texas GOP Officials You're invited! Join us October 26 at 7 p.m. Eastern Time in-person at Georgetown University in Washington, D.C. or online for a special event: "How White Christian Nationalism Threatens Our Democracy". Amanda will be alongside The Most Rev. Michael Curry (Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church) and Dr. Samuel Perry (the co-author of The Flag and the Cross: White Christian Nationalism and the Threat to American Democracy). The conversation will be moderated by the Rev. Jim Wallis, who is director of the Georgetown University Center on Faith and Justice. Visit this Eventbrite link for registration and livestream details.

What are Amanda and Holly watching in the new Supreme Court term? They preview 303 v. Elenis, a case involving a woman who says she doesn't want to design wedding websites for same-sex couples, and compare it to the Masterpiece Cakeshop case, in which the Court avoided the main question. Amanda and Holly also discuss an order from the Court's "shadow docket" involving Yeshiva University's refusal to recognize an LGBT club on campus, and they share why we're still watching that case. Plus, hear their reaction to Justice Samuel Alito's speech at a conference in Rome. SHOW NOTES: Segment 1: A free speech right to refuse to design wedding websites? (starting at 00:55) You can contact Amanda and Holly with your thoughts on the show by writing to RespectingReligion@BJConline.org. Learn more about the 2018 Masterpiece Cakeshop case and read BJC's brief at BJConline.org/Masterpiece Segment 2: The shadow docket decision regarding Yeshiva University (starting at 13:04) Read a brief recap of the Yeshiva decision on our website. Segment #3: Justice Alito's summer statements in Rome (starting at 19:24) Amanda and Holly discussed this speech by Justice Samuel Alito. They also mentioned this feature on Justice Alito in the New Yorker, written by Margaret Talbot: Justice Alito's Crusade Against a Secular America Isn't Over Amanda and Holly discussed this piece by Professor Alan Brownstein on the different uses of the word "public," published by The Hill: Religion in the public square See a list of our previous episodes by visiting RespectingReligion.org. Respecting Religion is made possible by BJC's generous donors. You can support these conversations with a gift to BJC.

The Supreme Court opened its new term this week, and Amanda and Holly look at where its last decisions are leading us. They provide updates on high-profile decisions, including the praying coach in Washington state who hasn't returned to work yet and the dilemmas facing religious schools in Maine. Amanda and Holly lament how this Court ignores the distinctiveness of religion, despite religion's special status in the Constitution. They view the Court as taking a major risk by leaving lower courts without better guidance. Amanda and Holly also weigh in on discussions regarding the Court's legitimacy and remind us that we can't just count on the Supreme Court to uphold our rights. Segment 1: Back after first Monday at the Court (starting at 01:07) You can contact Amanda and Holly with your thoughts on the show by writing to RespectingReligion@BJConline.org. Amanda was live outside the Supreme Court on the first day of the new term, and you can see that video here. Amanda and Holly wrote about the Supreme Court this week for USA Today: 'Pro-religion'? Conservative Supreme Court abandons long-standing religious liberty principles. Shurtleff v. Boston: Holly and Amanda discussed the oral arguments during Season 3 in episode 8, and they discussed the decision in episode 16. Ramirez v. Collier: Holly and Amanda previewed the case last season in episode 2, discussed the oral arguments in episode 4, and reviewed the decision in episode 16. Segment 2: Focusing on the two consequential cases that were overshadowed (starting at 13:27) Carson v. Makin: Access BJC's resources here. Kennedy v. Bremerton: Access BJC's resources here. Holly summarized both decisions in our latest magazine: Supreme Court continues to shift religious liberty landscape. Amanda and Holly discussed this article by Michelle Boorstein for the Washington Post (which includes comments from Holly): Under right-leaning Supreme Court, the church-state wall is crumbling Segment #3: What do Amanda and Holly make of conversations about this Court's legitimacy? (starting at 27:46) See a list of our previous episodes by visiting RespectingReligion.org. You can also access episodes of Respecting Religion on BJC's YouTube channel. Subscribe today! Respecting Religion is made possible by BJC's generous donors. You can support these conversations with a gift to BJC.

The Supreme Court is sowing more confusion with its Kennedy v. Bremerton decision, ruling for a public school official and abandoning long-standing Establishment Clause protections in ways that harm the religious freedom rights of students. In our season three finale – and our first episode in front of a live audience – Amanda and Holly discuss the impact of this ruling, and they ponder just what, exactly, would actually constitute "coercion" for this Court. The Supreme Court did not overrule the previous school prayer cases with the decision, but it did gut some of the consensus that protects the religious liberty rights of everyone at public schools. In the second and final segment, Amanda and Holly look to the next Supreme Court term and BJC's plans to continue its work defending faith freedom for all. The first segment of this episode was recorded in front of a live audience during the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship General Assembly in Dallas, Texas, on June 29, 2022. Segment 1: A six-justice majority upends settled law (starting at 06:07) Season three of Respecting Religion won the "Best in Class" award for specialty programming from the Religion Communicators Council's DeRose-Hinkhouse Awards. You can access BJC's resources on the Kennedy v. Bremerton case by visiting BJConline.org/Bremerton, including BJC's amicus brief in this case. You can read the Bremerton opinion here, written by Justice Neil Gorsuch. Justice Sonia Sotomayor's dissenting opinion includes photos of the prayer practice at issue (see pages 9 and 10 of the dissent, which are on pages 49 and 50 of the opinion PDF document). Segment 2: It's "game on" for BJC (starting at 30:09) Watch the livestream of Holly and Amanda recording the first segment of this podcast during our workshop at the CBF General Assembly at this link. Holly and Amanda discussed this NPR story by Nina Totenberg: The Supreme Court is the most conservative in 90 years Holly mentioned this article by Kelsey Dallas for Deseret News: The Supreme Court came together on religion this term. Then, it fell apart Amanda mentioned our BJC Luncheon, which was held in Dallas on June 30, listening to Indigenous voices on faith freedom. You can watch a video of the program on our YouTube page. While the podcast is taking a break, BJC is not! Keep up with our work by subscribing to our email list at BJConline.org/subscribe and following us on Twitter, Instagram, Facebook and YouTube. Respecting Religion is made possible by BJC's generous donors. You can support these conversations with a gift to BJC.

Does the Constitution require our government to fund religion? In a landmark ruling, the Supreme Court says, for the first time, that if a state has a program that includes funding for private schools it must also provide funding for religious schools. In this episode, Amanda and Holly examine the Carson v. Makin decision, which shows how the Supreme Court is shifting further and further away from the Establishment Clause's protections of religious liberty for all. They explore the Court's "bait and switch" to make this radical shift seem not so bad, and they look at all of the reasons the Framers thought it was smart to avoid government funding of religion. In segment three, Amanda and Holly review the latest misleading headlines that conflate "religious liberty" with a promotion of free exercise rights at the expense of Establishment Clause protections. SHOW NOTES Segment 1: A radical shift in religious liberty law (starting at 03:50) You can contact Amanda and Holly with your thoughts on the show by writing to RespectingReligion@BJConline.org. Amanda Tweeted her reaction to the Dobbs decision on Friday, June 24. You can see her Tweet thread here. Holly and Amanda recorded this episode before the Court released its opinion in the Kennedy v. Bremerton case on June 27, 2022. They will analyze that case in the next episode of Respecting Religion. Access BJC's resources on Carson v. Makin at BJConline.org/CarsonvMakin, including the brief we joined, Holly's article for our winter magazine, and our statement on decision day. Read the Supreme Court decision in Carson v. Makin at this link. We mentioned the two recent cases that led to this case: Trinity Lutheran v. Comer: BJConline.org/TrinityLutheran Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue: BJConline.org/Espinoza Segment 2: Where's the Establishment Clause? (starting at 19:18) Holly and Amanda mentioned these cases when discussing how the Court abandoned the "play in the joints" principle in religious freedom law and the impact of this case in state funding of religious schools: Locke v. Davey (2004) Zelman v. Simmons-Harris (2002) Amanda quoted from the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, written by Thomas Jefferson. Holly quoted from Memorial and Remonstrance against Religious Assessments, written by James Madison. Segment #3: More misleading headlines (starting at 33:02) Amanda and Holly discussed this New York Times newsletter written by Ian Prasad Philbrick: A Pro-Religion Court. It also links to a piece by Adam Liptak with some misleading shorthand, titled Supreme Court Rejects Maine's Ban on Aid to Religious Schools. Respecting Religion is made possible by BJC's generous donors. You can support these conversations with a gift to BJC.

The United States has a distinctive and increasingly destructive gun culture. In this episode, Amanda and Holly look at how embracing Christian nationalism correlates to opinions on gun control and why conversations about gun reform become more difficult when "God-given rights" are invoked and government-sponsored prayer is advanced as a policy solution after violence. Dive into this nuanced, complicated and emotional issue as our country reels from recent mass shootings and searches for policy solutions. SHOW NOTES Segment 1: What is it about Christian nationalism that drives such strong opposition to gun reform? (starting at 00:43) You can contact Amanda and Holly with your thoughts on the show by writing to RespectingReligion@BJConline.org. We've discussed manifestations of Christian nationalism this season in several episodes, including episode 6, episode 12, and episode 18. Visit ChristiansAgainstChristianNationalism.org for a statement to sign and additional resources on Christian nationalism. Amanda and Holly mentioned our 10-part podcast series on the dangers of Christian nationalism and corresponding discussion guide. You can listen to each episode individually at ChristiansAgainstChristianNationalism.org/podcasts, or you can visit our "BJC Podcast" feed and scroll back to episodes from 2019. The podcast discussion guide is also available at this link. Amanda mentioned Dr. Samuel Perry and Dr. Andrew Whitehead's book Taking America Back for God: Christian Nationalism in the United States, which uses a model to identify and explain Chrisitan nationalism and its impact on a variety of public policy issues and debates. You can see a quick overview in this one-page document. Dr. Samuel Perry and Dr. Philip Gorski have a new book out titled The Flag and the Cross: White Christian Nationalism and the Threat to American Democracy. Dr. Perry's recent article for TIME magazine is School Shootings Confirm That Guns Are the Religion of the Right Amanda mentioned this article by David French: Against Gun Idolatry. She also referred to this episode of the Good Faith podcast, with David French and Curtis Chang: Gun Violence, Gun Rights & Gun Idolatry. Segment 2: How do we see Christian nationalism impacting the debate on guns? (starting at 18:00) Amanda and Holly mentioned this article from Australia by Nicola Heath: Where do religious groups in the US stand on gun control? Segment #3: Clergy in action (starting at 35:28) Amanda and Holly mentioned these two articles: A profile of Peter Cook by Edward Helmore in The Guardian: The Christian leader trying to break America's link between faith and guns An opinion piece by Charlie Dates for Christianity Today: White Churches, It's Time to Go Pro-Life on Guns Respecting Religion is made possible by BJC's generous donors. You can support these conversations with a gift to BJC.

It's an election year, and we're already seeing high-profile primaries and debates over the role religion plays in elections. In this episode, Amanda and Holly discuss constructive engagement for religious organizations in elections and voting, discussing terms that often get confused – such as "political" and "partisan" – and the important role of religion and religious people when it comes to advocating for policies. They explain the tax benefit that houses of worship and other charitable organizations receive and what that means when it comes to partisan campaigns. Getting involved in elections is one way you can fight back against Christian nationalism, and this episode talks about the legal rules and the rules of thumb when it comes to making your voice heard in the public square. SHOW NOTES Segment 1: What's the difference between being political and being partisan? (starting at 04:22) You can contact Amanda and Holly with your thoughts on the show by writing to RespectingReligion@BJConline.org. Segment 2: Understanding the tax rules and steering clear of violations (starting at 16:21) Holly mentioned IRS guidance for churches that is available online. You can see it at this link. Amanda mentioned the Pew Research poll that shows a majority of both Republicans and Democrats identify as Christians. You can see the full religious landscape study and results at this link. Holly mentioned BJC's one-page handout with tips for being an advocate instead of a partisan. You can see that here. For additional resources from BJC on churches and political campaigns – as well as the "Johnson Amendment" – visit BJConline.org/JohnsonAmendment. Segment #3: An extreme example (starting at 37:22) Amanda and Holly mentioned this post on our website: Troubling growth of Christian nationalism on display in the pulpit, on the campaign trail

Imagine your house of worship is facing destruction and your elected officials could stop it, but they were more concerned with how others view your sacred space. That's the scenario facing the San Carlos Apache and other tribes in their fight to preserve their sacred land of Chí'chil Biłdagoteel, loosely translated in English as "Oak Flat." In this podcast, learn more about this issue facing our Indigenous neighbors and how you can use your position to make a difference and save sacred land. Just because a religious group doesn't build a steeple, it doesn't mean the sacredness of the land is any less than a church or mosque or other worship site. Show notes: Segment 1: Land use and religious freedom (segments starts at 01:12) RLUIPA is an acronym for the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, which became law in 2000. Starting at 12:17, we played audio of congressional testimony from Naelyn Pike, a youth Apache Leader. She gave this testimony on March 12, 2020, during a hearing of the Subcommittee on Indigenous Peoples of the United States in the U.S. House of Representatives. You can watch the entire hearing at this link, and her testimony begins at 8:21 in that video. Segment 2: How did we get here? Sweetheart deals in the NDAA (starting at 18:03) NDAA stands for the "National Defense Authorization Act," which is the bill that authorizes the annual budget and expenditures of the U.S. Department of Defense. The Save Oak Flat Act is H.R. 1884/S. 915. Learn more about Chí'chil Biłdagoteel and the Save Oak Flat Act, including social media posts you can share, at BJConline.org/SaveOakFlat. The individual petition you can sign will be linked on that page in the near future. Read the letter from more than 100 religious and religious freedom groups sent to Congress asking to Save Oak Flat. If you would like to contact your members of Congress about co-sponsoring the Save Oak Flat Act, here is a sample script you can use: Hello, my name is [Name]. I am a constituent and am calling to ask Representative/Senator [Name] to co-sponsor the Save Oak Flat Act. Oak Flat is an ancient sacred site for the Apache and several other tribes in the Southwest. The federal government is giving the land to a foreign mining operation that will totally destroy this holy ground. Oak Flat's sacredness is not lessened because their tradition does not build a steeple to mark it. Will Rep./Sen. [Name] co-sponsor the Save Oak Flat Act? Not sure who your members of Congress are? Click here to find out. Segment 3: What can you do to Save Oak Flat? (starting at 34:18) See a list of 18 ways you can advocate for Oak Flat in this piece by BJC Associate General Counsel Jennifer Hawks on Medium: Celebrate Earth Day 2022 by protecting Oak Flat Learn more about the Oak Flat Challenge in this article on Medium: What does 1.8 have to do with faith freedom for all? See examples of the Oak Flat Challenge on Facebook here and in our Instagram highlight here. Hear from Indigenous voices on faith freedom this summer in Dallas at our BJC Luncheon. On Thursday, June 30, we'll be at the Hyatt Regency Dallas, and you can learn more and purchase a ticket at BJConline.org/Luncheon. Plus, we'll be doing a live recording of the Respecting Religion podcast on June 29 during our workshop at the CBF General Assembly. There is no cost to attend the assembly in Dallas – learn more at this link. As always, you can contact Amanda and Holly by writing to RespectingReligion@BJConline.org. Respecting Religion is made possible by BJC's generous donors. You can support these conversations with a gift to BJC.

It's been quite the week for the Supreme Court, releasing a decision in a case we were watching and responding to the unprecedented leak of a draft opinion in a case that captured the attention of the entire country. In this episode, Holly and Amanda break down Monday's ruling in Shurtleff v. Boston – about a city flying a Christian flag – and the recent decision in Ramirez v. Collier – concerning religion in the execution chamber. They also react to the big Supreme Court news this week: the leak of a draft opinion for Dobbs vs. Jackson Women's Health Organization, the case challenging a Mississippi law that restricts abortion. Amanda and Holly share their reactions to what's happening at the Court and preview what's to come. SHOW NOTES Segment 1: The leaked Dobbs draft opinion and a decision in Shurtleff v. Boston (segments starts at 00:55, the discussion of Shurtleff begins at 8:16) Josh Gerstein and Alexander Ward of Politico broke the story with the leaked draft opinion: Supreme Court has voted to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows Amanda and Holly discussed Shurtleff v. Boston on two previous episodes this season: They previewed the oral arguments in episode 8 and reviewed the arguments – and made predictions – in episode 10. Read the Supreme Court's opinion in the case, written by Justice Stephen Breyer, and the concurring opinions at this link. Segment 2: Say "yes" unless you have a really good reason to say "no" (starting at 23:41) The Supreme Court issued its decision in Ramirez vs. Collier on March 24. Amanda and Holly discussed the case in episode 2 and episode 4. Read the Supreme Court's decision, written by Chief Justice John Roberts, the concurring opinions and Justice Clarence Thomas's dissent at this link. "RLUIPA" is shorthand for the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, which became law in 2000. The new filing from a district attorney in Ramirez v. Collier is discussed in this New York Times article by Ruth Graham: Days After Setting an Execution Date, a Texas Prosecutor Reverses Course Segment 3: A rich holiday season (starting at 38:45) Amanda and Holly mentioned this article by Adelle Banks in Religion News Service: Second gentleman Doug Emhoff touts 'critical' interfaith collaboration As always, you can contact Amanda and Holly by writing to RespectingReligion@BJConline.org. Respecting Religion is made possible by BJC's generous donors. You can support these conversations with a gift to BJC.

This week, the Supreme Court discussed a coach-led prayer practice on the football field, hearing two very different versions of the facts. Amanda and Holly review Monday's oral arguments in Kennedy v. Bremerton in this podcast, sharing their four takeaways and playing key courtroom exchanges. From the fights over the facts to conflating the rights of students and school officials, there are plenty of moments that caused more than fleeting concerns. SHOW NOTES: Segment 1: Get your facts straight (starting at 00:51) You can see Amanda's videos outside the Supreme Court on oral argument day on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram. Amanda and Holly previewed Kennedy v. Bremerton in Episode 14. Americans United for Separation of Church and State represented the Bremerton school district, and Richard Katskee presented their arguments in the courtroom. First Liberty represented Coach Joseph Kennedy, and Paul Clement presented their arguments in the courtroom. In this segment, we played the following clips, which are all available from the Supreme Court's audio recording of the oral arguments: Justice Stephen Breyer (from 15:37 in the oral argument) Justice Elena Kagan and Paul Clement (from 37:59 in the oral argument) Chief Justice John Roberts (from 57:28 in the oral argument) You can learn more about Kennedy v. Bremerton and read BJC's brief in the case at BJConline.org/Bremerton. Segment 2: Tim Tebow, Mohamed Salah, and examples that aren't relevant to this case (starting at 19:30) Amanda and Holly mentioned several cases about religion and public schools: Tinker v. Des Moines (1969) Santa Fe v. Doe (2000) Engel v. Vitale (1962) Abington v. Schempp (1963) Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971 – origin of the "Lemon test") In this segment, we played the following clips, which are all available from the Supreme Court's audio recording of the oral arguments: Paul Clement answering a question from Justice Brett Kavanaugh (from 43:26 in the oral argument) Justice Brett Kavanaguh and Richard Katskee (from 01:01:42 in the oral argument) Justice Neil Gorsuch and Richard Katskee (from 01:27:16 in the oral argument) Justice Samuel Alito and Richard Katskee (from 01:18:32 in the oral argument) The American Jewish Committee, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, and the General Synod of the United Church of Christ joined BJC's brief, which was co-authored by Professors Douglas Laycock and Christopher Lund. Segment 3: Where do we go from here? (starting at 40:40) Holly's reaction to the case was quoted in this article from the Los Angeles Times by David Savage: Supreme Court conservatives lean toward allowing football coach's postgame prayers Dr. Charles Haynes shared his experience teaching guidelines in the public schools in this piece for Baptist News Global: At the Supreme Court: The First Amendment on the 50-yard-line Respecting Religion is made possible by BJC's generous donors. You can support these conversations with a gift to BJC.