Critics say Trump's religion agenda will benefit conservative Christians the most
President
Donald Trump
has won plaudits from his
base of conservative Christian supporters
for establishing multiple faith-related entities.
'We're bringing back religion in our country,' Trump said at a recent Rose Garden event, on the National Day of Prayer, when he announced the creation of the Religious Liberty Commission. 'We must always be one nation under God, a phrase that they would like to get rid of, the radical left.'
But others, including some Christians, are alarmed by these acts — saying Trump isn't protecting religion in general but granting a privileged status to politically conservative expressions of Christianity that happen to include his supporters.
What's up with the 'separation of church and state' debate?
Critics are even more aghast that he's questioning a core understanding of the First Amendment. 'They say 'separation between church and state,'' Trump said at the prayer day gathering, when he talked about establishing the White House Faith Office. 'I said, all right, let's forget about that for one time.'
Trump's creation of these various bodies is 'definitely not normal, and it's very important to not look at them as individual entities,' said the Rev. Shannon Fleck, executive director of Faithful America, a progressive Christian advocacy organization.
'They are indicative of an entire system that is being constructed at the national level,' she said. 'It's a system specifically designed to guide and shape culture in the U.S.'
Fleck worries about the combined effect of Trump administration actions and a
spate of decisions
by the U.S.
Supreme Court
in recent years. The court, now with three Trump appointees, has lowered barriers between church and state in its interpretations of the First Amendment's ban on any congressionally recognized establishment of religion.
'My freedom of religion runs right up to the point when yours begins, and if I am then trying to establish something that's going to affect your right to practice your faith, that is against the First Amendment,' Fleck said.
But religious supporters of Trump are happy with his expansion of religion-related offices.
'We were a nation birthed by prayer, founded on the Judeo-Christian ethic to ensure that people could worship as they wished,' said Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, a Republican, at the Rose Garden ceremony where he was announced as chair of the Religious Liberty Commission. Many members are conservative Christian clerics and commentators; some have supported Trump politically. The event featured Christian praise music along with Jewish, Muslim and Christian prayers.
White House assistant press secretary Taylor Rogers, via email, said the commission is ensuring 'that all Americans' God-given right is protected, no matter their religion.' Rogers said the criticism is coming from anti-Trump advocacy groups that are trying to undermine his agenda.
A closer look at the new religious entities
The three entities created under Trump overlap in their marching orders and, in some cases, their membership.
In February, Trump established the White House Faith Office, led by evangelist Paula White-Cain as a 'special government employee,' according to the announcement. She's resuming a similar role she held in the first Trump administration.
White-Cain — who also serves on the new Religious Liberty Commission — was one of the earliest high-profile Christian leaders to support Trump's 2016 presidential campaign and is considered Trump's spiritual adviser.
Her office is designed to consult 'experts within the faith community' on 'practices to better align with the American values.' It also is tasked with religious-liberty training and promoting grant opportunities for faith-based entities; and working to 'identify failures' in federal protection for religious liberty.
Also in February, Trump
created a Task Force to Eradicate Anti-Christian Bias
, led by Attorney General Pam Bondi with representatives from several federal departments.
Its mandate is to expose and reverse what Trump claims were 'egregious' violations of Christians' rights under former President Joe Biden. Many of those claims have been disputed, as has the
need for singling out for protection
the nation's largest and most culturally and politically dominant religious group.
A White House action focused on a specific religion is not unprecedented. The Biden administration, for example, issued strategy plans to combat antisemitism and Islamophobia. Both Trump administrations have issued executive orders on combating antisemitism.
An April hearing of the Task Force to Eradicate Anti-Christian Bias featured witnesses from across federal departments, alleging that Christians during the Biden administration faced discrimination for such things as opposing vaccine mandates or 'DEI/LGBT ideology' on religious grounds. Some claimed that schools' legal or tax enforcement actions were actually targeted because of their Christian religion.
The State and
Veterans Affairs
departments have asked people to report alleged instances of anti-Christian bias.
The White House said the Justice Department formed specific task forces to respond to what it called a 'concentration of bias' against Christians and Jews, but that it's committed to combating discrimination against Americans of any faith.
The latest entity to be created, the Religious Liberty Commission, has a mandate to recommend policies to protect and 'celebrate America's peaceful religious pluralism.'
Patrick, the chair, has supported legislation requiring Texas school districts to allow prayer time for students and says he wants his state to emulate Louisiana in requiring the Ten Commandments to be posted in public school classrooms.
Among the commission's mandates: to look into 'conscience protections in the health care field and concerning vaccine mandates' and government 'displays with religious imagery.'
Among the commissioners are Catholic bishops, Protestant evangelists, a rabbi and attorneys focused on religious liberty cases. Its advisory boards include several Christian and some Jewish and Muslim members.
A commission member, author and broadcaster, Eric Metaxas, supported its work in a column Friday for the conservative site Blaze Media.
'This commission's goal is to strengthen the liberty of every single American — regardless of that person's faith and even of whether that person has any faith,' he wrote. 'It also aims to restore those liberties attacked by hostile and misguided secularists.'
Fulfilling a priority for Trump's conservative Christian backers
Charles Haynes, senior fellow for religious liberty at the Freedom Forum, a nonpartisan foundation focused on First Amendment rights, said the various entities reflect Trump's attempt to fulfill an agenda priority of his conservative Christian supporters.
He said the entities' work reflects their long-standing contention that the First Amendment has 'been misapplied to keep Christians out of the public square, to discriminate against Christianity, by which they mean their understandings of Christianity.'
Trump's moves and recent Supreme Court cases are reversing a consensus dating at least to the 1940s that the First Amendment strictly prohibits government-sponsored religion at the federal and state levels, Haynes said.
He said the First Amendment actually provides broad protections for religious expressions in settings such as public schools. He helped write a
Freedom Forum guide
on religion in public schools, endorsed by groups across the ideological spectrum. It notes that within some limits, students can pray on their own time in schools, express their faith in class assignments, distribute religious literature, form school religious clubs and receive some accommodations based on religious belief.
But Haynes noted that the Supreme Court is now considering allowing Oklahoma to pay for a
Catholic charter school
, which he said could erase a long-standing standard that public-funded schools don't teach a particular religion.
'It's a very different day in the United States when both the Supreme Court and the president of the United States appear to be intent on changing the arrangement on religious freedom that we thought was in place,' Haynes said. 'It's a radical departure from how we've understood ourselves.'
___
Associated Press religion coverage receives support through the AP's
collaboration
with The Conversation US, with funding from Lilly Endowment Inc. The AP is solely responsible for this content.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
8 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
It's time to save the whales again
Diving in a kelp forest in Monterey Bay recently, I watched a tubby 200-pound harbor seal follow a fellow diver, nibbling on his flippers. The diver, a graduate student, was using sponges to collect DNA samples from the ocean floor. Curious seals, he told me, can be a nuisance. When he bags his sponges and places them in his collection net, they sometimes bite into them, puncturing the bags and spoiling his samples. Under the Marine Mammal Protection Act, coming closer than 50 yards to seals and dolphins is considered harassment, but they're free to harass you, which seems only fair given the centuries of deadly whaling and seal hunting that preceded a generational shift in how we view the world around us. The shift took hold in 1969, the year a massive oil spill coated the Santa Barbara coastline and the Cuyahoga River, in Cleveland, caught fire. Those two events helped spark the first Earth Day, in 1970, and the shutdown of America's last whaling station in 1971. Protecting the environment from pollution and from loss of wilderness and wildlife quickly moved from a protest issue to a societal ethic as America's keystone environmental legislation was passed at around the same time, written by a Democratic Congress and signed into law by a Republican president, Richard Nixon. Those laws include the National Environmental Policy Act (1969) , the Clean Air Act (1970), the Clean Water Act (1972) and the Marine Mammal Protection Act (1972), which goes further than the Endangered Species Act (1973) in protecting all marine mammals, not just threatened ones, from harassment, killing or capture by U.S. citizens in U.S. waters and on the high seas. All these 'green' laws and more are under attack by the Trump administration, its congressional minions and longtime corporate opponents of environmental protections, including the oil and gas industry. Republicans' disingenuous argument for weakening the Endangered Species Act and the Marine Mammal Protection Act is that the legislation has worked so well in rebuilding wildlife populations that it's time to loosen regulations for a better balance between nature and human enterprise. When it comes to marine mammal populations, that premise is wrong. On July 22, at a House Natural Resources subcommittee meeting, Republican Rep. Nick Begich of Alaska introduced draft legislation that would scale back the Marine Mammal Protection Act. Among other things, his proposal would limit the ability of the federal government to take action against 'incidental take,' the killing of whales, dolphins and seals by sonic blasts from oil exploration, ship and boat strikes or by drowning as accidental catch (also known as bycatch) in fishing gear. Begich complained that marine mammal protections interfere with 'essential projects like energy development, port construction, and even fishery operations.' Rep. Jared Huffman (D-San Rafael), the ranking member on the House Resources Committee, calls the legislation a 'death sentence' for marine mammals. It's true that the marine mammal law has been a success in many ways. Since its passage, no marine mammal has gone extinct and some species have recovered dramatically. The number of northern elephant seals migrating to California beaches to mate and molt grew from 10,000 in 1972 to about 125,000 today. There were an estimated 11,000 gray whales off the West Coast when the Marine Mammal Protection Act became law; by 2016, the population peaked at 27,000. But not all species have thrived. Historically there were about 20,000 North Atlantic right whales off the Eastern Seaboard. They got their name because they were the 'right' whales to harpoon — their bodies floated for easy recovery after they were killed. In 1972 they were down to an estimated 350 individuals. After more than half a century of federal legal protection, the population is estimated at 370. They continue to suffer high mortality rates from ship strikes, entanglement in fishing gear and other causes, including noise pollution and greater difficulty finding prey in warming seas. Off Florida, a combination of boat strikes and algal pollution threaten some 8,000-10,000 manatees. The population's recovery (from about 1,000 in 1979) has been significant enough to move them off the endangered species list in 2017, but since the beginning of this year alone, nearly 500 have died. Scientists would like to see them relisted, but at least they're still covered by the Marine Mammal Protection Act. A 2022 study in the Gulf of Mexico found that in areas affected by the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill 12 years earlier, the dolphin population had declined 45% and that it might take 35 years to recover. In the Arctic Ocean off Alaska, loss of sea ice is threatening polar bears (they're considered marine mammals), bowhead and beluga whales, walruses, ringed seals and harp seals. On the West Coast the number of gray whales — a Marine Mammal Act success story and now a cautionary tale — has crashed by more than half in the last decade to fewer than 13,000, according to a recent report by National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA, the nation's lead ocean agency, is an endangered species in its own right in the Trump era). Declining prey, including tiny shrimp-like amphipods, in the whales' summer feeding grounds in the Arctic probably caused by warming water are thought to be a major contributor to their starvation deaths and reduced birth rates. The whale's diving numbers are just one signal that climate change alone makes maintaining the Marine Mammal Act urgent. Widespread marine heat waves linked to a warming ocean are contributing to the loss of kelp forests that sea otters and other marine mammals depend on. Algal blooms off California, and for the first time ever, Alaska, supercharged by warmer waters and nutrient pollution, are leading to the deaths of thousands of dolphins and sea lions. What the Trump administration and its antiregulation, anti-environmental-protection supporters fail to recognize is that the loss of marine mammals is an indicator for the declining health of our oceans and the natural world we depend on and are a part of. This time, saving the whales will be about saving ourselves. David Helvarg is executive director of Blue Frontier, an ocean policy group. His next book, 'Forest of the Sea: The Remarkable Life and Imperiled Future of Kelp,' is scheduled to be published in 2026.
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Will Trump contain his jealousy of Zelensky or is Ukraine's president walking into another White House ambush?
Will Trump contain his jealousy of Zelensky or is Ukraine's president walking into another White House ambush?Source The Independent
Los Angeles Times
39 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
After Trump greets Putin with red carpet treatment, Ukrainians feel betrayed
KYIV, Ukraine — In Kyiv, Ukrainians living under near daily Russian bombardment watched with astonishment as their country's most important ally rolled out a red carpet in Alaska for the man they blame for more than three years of war, bloodshed and loss. Natalya Lypei, 66, a Kyiv resident, was taken aback: The images flashing on her phone screen showed President Trump greeting Vladimir Putin warmly and clapping as the Russian leader approached him, after having been escorted into the country by four American fighter jets. Trump also ignored the arrest warrant issued for Putin by the International Criminal Court that has kept him mostly confined at home or in nations that are strong allies of Moscow. 'How can you welcome a tyrant like that?' she asked, echoing the views of many Kyiv residents. The red carpet treatment, the lack of concrete decisions for Ukraine and, most significant, neglecting the significance of sanctions — a policy that could turn the tide in Kyiv's favor — have felt like a betrayal for Ukrainians who have borne enormous suffering in the almost 3½ years since Russia's full-scale invasion. Tens of thousands of Ukrainian service members have been killed or wounded, thousands of civilians have been killed in Russian strikes, and a fifth of the country is under occupation, severing families, properties and Ukraine's territorial integrity. On Ukrainian social media, memes of Putin and Trump walking down a red carpet strewn with dead Ukrainian bodies were widely shared. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky had anticipated that the meeting would be a boon for Putin and that there would be little in the way of results. Speaking to reporters in the days leading up to the summit, he said it would end up being a public relations victory for the Russian leader. Above all else, he said, Putin was seeking a photo on American soil — which he got in Friday's meeting. It was the first time in a decade that Putin had stepped foot in the U.S., ending international isolation spurred by the 2022 Ukraine invasion; in other words, it was a win. For Lypei, whose serviceman son was killed last year, it was like attending another funeral, a fresh loss. This time, she said, her country's hopes for a just peace. 'It hurts me a lot that my child died in a full-scale war, and today we saw a new funeral,' she said. Her 34-year-old son fought with Ukraine's 79th Brigade and was killed in the Donetsk region, one of the areas Putin wants Ukraine to cede to Russia as a condition for a truce. 'I do not wish anyone that sorrow, that sadness, those tears,' she said. Natalya Cucil, 60, another Kyiv resident, said she was surprised that Trump did not produce any results from the meeting, despite his stated efforts to end the war. 'There are no results and we don't know if there will be, although we always expect something and hope for it,' she said. Pensioner Anatolii Kovalenko, 72, said no matter what was discussed between the two leaders, it is clear his country's adversary has won in the sphere of public relations. 'Putin won this meeting 100%,' he said. Kullab and Babenko write for the Associated Press.
