#RelS390B

[chandler-muriel]

[jsalcedoblog-blog]

[e-jom]

In this episode in his “I spend a day with” series, Internet Personality Anthony Padilla sits with Ex-Mormons and interviews them about their experience living as a member of a Mormon community and their reasons for leaving.

A “Mormon” is a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, or LDS Church for short. Founded by Joseph Smith in 1830 New York, the LDS Church upholds many religious beliefs that were influenced by Christianity, such as the Holy Trinity, but are largely disputed to be an expression of Christianity due to the differences in these beliefs. Mormons make up about 2 percent of the US population and have been growing in numbers and political influence for the past few decades. Mormons are known to consistently hold conservative moral and political values, which have led some members with more liberal mindsets to question their place in the community.

While this video may not be the most academic work in delving into the practices and philosophies held within a religious community, Padilla’s interview lends a voice to ex-Mormons. He brings attention to the issues of those who have felt marginalized and shamed within Mormon communities and provides insight as to how the LDS Church deals with these people.

One important topic these interview covers are the strict practices and rigid rules the LDS Church imposes on its members. As explained by the interviewees, Mormons are expected to conform to an intensely conservative religious lifestyle; they are expected to hold daily family prayers, go to church every Sunday, and be active member in the LDS Church community. If a Mormon were deviate from these practices, they would be judged harshly by their families and community. In these interviews, the ex-Mormons bring up homophobia in particular within the Mormon community and the backlash they faced for being gay.

A detail worth noting is the mention of the LDS Church attempting to rebrand their members away from the term “Mormon”. Just as discussed in the class textbook Religion and Politics in America by Robert Fowler, most major religions “have had to adopt evangelical strategies to survive in the American religious marketplace.” Historically, public opinion of Mormons hasn’t been the most favorable; as pointed out in Chapter 3 of the textbook, Mormons in the 19th century often faced severe and deadly persecution due to their beliefs and practices, such as polygamy, that “clashed with the broader American culture.” The LDS Church learned from these experiences and have since been become a thriving and highly organized group with a noticeable political influence. But as more liberal activist movements have taken place throughout the US in recent decades, it makes sense for the LDS Church to want to separate from associations of their more conservative history in order to appeal to a younger, more liberal-minded demographic. Another reason for this push, as pointed out by one of the interviewees, is to make the religion appear more based in Christianity even though most of the Christian community does not consider the LDS Church an expression of Christian faith. This aligns with the goal to expand in numbers as the majority of the US population practice some form of Christianity (73 percent, according to the Fowler textbook); it’s easier for Mormons to recruit people to their faith if it appears similar to what people already practicing.

[carlos37sd-blog]

[jotchis99]

Many Americans have studied the Bible in some capacity at one point or another in their lives. In the United States, where it has been established from the very beginning that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” the question has so often become, “Where does the line between church and state get drawn?” Many throughout history “…have argued that the Bible heavily influenced America’s founders” (Pew Research Center). However, as has been discussed on numerous occasions in our course of Religion and American Institutions, many of the Founding Fathers embodied a more Deist series of religious beliefs rather than a Christian one. If they had been so inspired by the Bible, then it is highly unlikely that such a clause in the First Amendment allowing for freedom of religion would have been established in the first place.

 That being said, it is hard to say that some of our most basic laws were not in some way influenced by the Bible. While there are some things that we know to be morally wrong in every way (i.e. murder, amongst others), the world we live in today is one that is constantly changing, and the question arises of where to draw the line between the Bible’s influence over our laws and doing what we believe to be morally right. A recent study conducted by the Pew Research Center indicated that “…about half of Americans (49%) say the Bible should have at least ‘some’ influence on U.S. laws, including nearly a quarter (23%) who say it should have a ‘great deal’ of influence…” (Pew Research Center). Furthermore, amongst Christians the U.S., 68% overall believe that the Bible should in some way influence our laws (35% believe a great deal, 33% believe somewhat).

 This study, if nothing else, indicates that we as a society are heavily divided on this issue. What is also of particular interest is that among people who identify with a particular faith, there are wide ranging divides over whether or not there should be Biblical influence. For instance, the study’s three main religious groups are Christian, Catholic, and Jewish. It has been previously established that 68% of Christians (including a high water mark of 89% among white evangelical Protestants), according to this study believe in at least some form of biblical influence over American laws. That number dwindles down to 51% and 31% for Catholics and Jews respectively. Additionally, amongst people unaffiliated with any religious group, who according to this study are Atheists, Agnostics, or have no particular faith, that number drops even further to just 21%.

 It is all too easy to believe that the United States was built upon a Christian system. Christians were, after all, the first Europeans to permanently settle on the continent. That being said, however, the United States was a country that was founded on the basic principle of freedom, and the First Amendment makes it clear that freedom of religion is, in a sense, superior to all others, since it is the first freedom to appear within the amendment (before freedom of speech remarkably). Religion has been an issue which has divided humanity for centuries, and it is clear that even today, there is a great amount of difficulty between those who support and oppose the separation of church and state.

[hf-rels390b]

In our society today, people of every color, nationality, race and ethnicity are represented in our country, and throughout the world. Of these individuals, the way of living life, thinking, learning, and even worshipping all vary greatly – making up the unique fabric of the United States of America. Where each individual comes from, and the traditions and belief systems that transpire as a result of different upbringings and influences greatly impacts the way an individual views and practices religion.

In this Pew Research Study, adults in the United States were surveyed and asked to name the first individual that comes to mind when a specific religion was mentioned. The religions mentioned: Buddhism, Catholicism, Judaism, Evangelical Protestantism, Atheism, and Islam. When asked about Buddhism, Judaism, and Islam, a large majority of American’s were quick to name historical religious figures and individuals closely associated to each religion. For Catholicism and Evangelical Protestantism, Americans were quick to name “modern day” well-known figures. As for Atheism, nearly half of all respondents couldn’t name a single individual that came to mind when they were asked about Atheism.

All of these responses may seem trivial and unimportant, but I strongly believe this word-association survey of sorts speaks volumes to what we (as Americans) know and understand about religions other than our own (if applicable). If a religion is deemed as “less-popular” within certain communities or areas of the country, it is more likely American’s may be uninformed or even unwilling to consider and learn about different religious perspectives.

To break this study down a bit, Buddhism, Judaism and Islam are all religions that are discussed a fair amount within western culture. Buddhism has long been praised in areas of the United States, with historic ties to meditation and yoga practice. Although Buddhism is practiced in our country, many American’s associate Buddha with Buddhism due to how western culture has adopted elements of the religion. Many respondents associated Judaism with Jesus or Moses. This is likely due to a common biblical knowledge of Jewish practice and traditions that may stem from one’s own Christian or Jewish beliefs. When we consider Islam from the lens of western culture, I believe many respondents associate Muhammad Ali due to pop culture and sports-related media and references. To reflect on these responses, it is clear that these three religions received the responses they did due to their general “popularity” and familiarity within the United States – regardless of the religious, spiritual or cultural reason they are familiar among Americans.

In our course, Religion and American Institutions (RELS390B), we have discussed in depth the stereotypes and common misconceptions of various religions due to a commonality among world views among groups, especially Americans. In our verbal in-class discussions and TopHat quizzes, it is surprising to hear and see that many of my classmates share similar worldviews and perceptions of other lesser-practiced religions. However, it is very important to consider the audience in class when discussing views on religion. Many of us are young adults with liberal beliefs, with the shared identity as a college student at a diverse university in Southern California. It is obvious that our beliefs and knowledge of religion will be vastly different than a classroom of individuals across the world, taking a similar course. I think as a society, we can learn a lot as we reflect on this study.

We should ask ourselves why our associations to certain religions are what they are, and why we have yet to seek out a greater understanding of those religions. Immersing ourselves in the task of gaining a deeper understanding of other cultures and religions benefits society as a whole, as well as on an interpersonal level. If I can better understand your walk of life through the eyes of your religious practice (or lack of), and you can do the same to understand me, it inevitably creates a basic connection between humans, that highlights similarities among us, rather than dwelling on differences.

[hannahmoha26]

           We live in a time where many events in U.S history were thought would never happen at least during this era, but carried through. For instance, we experienced having the first African American president and we also experienced having female presidential candidates. We have seen Muslim congress members and we even saw legalized gay marriage in all 50 states. We have come such a long way, but we still have some more surprises in store for us.

          This election we have not one, but two Jewish members running for president. These two men, Bloomberg and Sanders, are said to have a good chance to appear on ballots in November according to this article provided by Jewish Telegraphic Agency. To refresh our memory from class lectures and readings, we learned that Jews occupy 2% of the US population and have a very successful community. America has been welcoming to the Jewish community compared to other religious minorities due to the injustices they have faced such as the Holocaust and their long-standing history in the US. We can see from their time in America, they have done a decent job in building up their community and co-existing with American values. For this reason, Jews have a home in the US with religious tolerance and have been able to thrive in regards to education and socio-economic status.

          Jews have historically been more liberal than conservative in terms of Politics. For instance, 78% voted for Obama in 2008 and 69% voted again for the re-election in 2012. With this in mind, we can have a good guess without knowing that Sanders and Bloomberg are indeed democrats. These two candidates are highly respected and said to make a mark in US politics for different reasons. Sanders is a highly attractive candidate for the American Jewish community that has been more progressive and liberal and who stands with left-wing activism. Whereas, Bloomberg becomes the top choice for others who are more concerned with protecting their assets and who identify closely with the right-wing position. Sanders has been especially popular in California taken that it is more of a liberal state filled with progressive citizens. He is a common name mentioned on university campuses all throughout California and has been a favorite within social activists and the LGBTQ+ community. On the other hand, Bloomberg has made a lasting impression among Jewish citizens across the US taken that he is a former mayor of NY and a successful billionaire funding his own campaign. Many Americans are interested in a candidate with the ability and financial resources to persevere and beat Trump which arguably gives Bloomberg an advantage.

          Within my own circle, Bernie Sanders has definitely been the preference of my friends but Bloomberg has been the top pick of the older folks in my life as they have ruled him to be more realistic in his expectations. I’m unsure what America is ready for at this time, is the country ready for a liberal progressive Jewish President or are we ready for a conservative Jew that will take care of our personal assets during uncertain times? Maybe the honest question is: are we even ready for a Jewish president all together?

[rowenaatsdsu]

           This article features new statistics gathered by Gallup poll that the number of U.S. adults who belong to religious institutions has significantly dropped from 70% to 50%. One out of four adults who profess themselves to be part of a religion do not feel the need to attend church services or be an official member of an institution.

           A concept we learned in class, the religious nones, are brought up as a contributing factor to the decline in church attendance. Nones are individuals by subconsciousness not part of any organized religion. I myself am agnostic and fall under the none category. We learned that nones perform the best on the U.S. Religious Knowledge quiz by Pew Research Center and I believe it is because we seek to learn about all religions because you cannot truly denounce or reject a belief if you do not know what it is in the first place.

I myself grew up in a Roman Catholic household, went to church every Sunday and after moving out, attended a non-denominational mega church. I then attended a Baptist church before finally becoming agnostic when I left religion altogether after learning more about other faiths. My path is similar to a lot of millennials today: growing up in a religious household then losing faith after moving out. The article mentions that the rise of nones has increased from 8% in 2000 to 19% in 2018, a statistic also found in our textbook (citing nones as 15-20%).

We also learned in class that nones weaken well-established religious institutions, and so the dwindling number of churchgoers and rise of nones is a clear sign of this. The article warns that declining membership of churches effect efforts for the homeless and other charitable endeavors, but the church is not the be-all, end-all to helping those in need. Nowadays, there are charities like children international that aim to aid those in need, with no religious affiliation attached.

[collinmandichak-blog]

RelS390B

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/04/13/half-of-americans-say-bible-should-influence-u-s-laws-including-28-who-favor-it-over-the-will-of-the-people/

           The first amendment of the Constitution explicitly grants all US citizens freedom of religion, meaning that the government can not establish any laws that mandate a religious institution. In a study done by the Pew Research Center, 49% of Americans thought that the Bible should have some consideration when creating legislation. Although roughly half of Americans believe that the Bible should have some influence, 51% of the population is against religion interfering with politics. Thomas Jefferson held the same view as the majority, believing that there should be a separation of church and state. His opinion is worth listening to because he was part of the Christian community while still emphasizing the importance of keeping religion separate from legislative decisions. In the research done by the Pew Center 68% of Christian Americans responded saying that the Bible should have some influence. Despite the responses from the Christian community regarding biblical influence, this impedes the Constitutional rights of Americans. 

     Along with Jefferson, James Madison also held the same value of the separation of church and state. The Articles of Confederation originally did not mention anything about religion or let alone have any amendments. The frailness of the Articles proved itself when there was a need to amend the original document. At the Constitutional Convention James Madison along with the others present drafted the first amendment, separating church and state. Although Jefferson was not present at the Constitutional Convention, James Madison was there to uphold both their beliefs. Their own religious values were suppressed in order to do what was thought best for the success of the nation. The core values of the United States include preserving the citizens freedom. When responding that the Bible should have influence in legislation it takes away the freedoms of citizens who do not hold the same religious values. Approximately 15-20% of the US population are classified under the “none” category, meaning that they do not follow a religion. The Bible is not a sacred text for the people classified under the “none” category.  If the Bible were to be taken into consideration for creating legislation people would be forced to follow laws that were created from the ideas of a religion that they do not follow. This concept would undermine the very ideas established by the Constitution. 

     Although we do not currently take the consideration of the Bible when making legislation, the Republican party is statistically founded to be more religious than other political parties. Lawmakers do not directly take the ideas from the Bible into consideration, but their religion is part of their values. The Bible shares many stories about morals which makes it hard to identify the difference between one’s own belief and one that is influenced by religious texts. This makes it hard to separate their ideas from spilling into the legislation that they create. The separation of powers prevents religion from impeding the lives of Americans that do not want to follow a set religious institution. No matter how Americans feel about the influence of the Bible in legislation this can not occur due to freedom of religion. The United States was founded on the different freedoms and is what makes it unique from other countries. 

[christianangeles]

Story Date: Jan. 5, 2020

According to this article from The Christian Post, the Chinese Communist Party is planning to impose harsh new regulations and measures on religious groups and personnel within their country. Groups such as Chinese Christians are especially worried for what this could mean for future gatherings in the future. The article states that “under the new rules, every aspect of the life of religious communities is subject to approval by the government’s religious affairs department.” These sanctions being implemented on the Chinese people resonates heavily with me as an Asian-American living in the United States. It’s hard to imagine myself living in a situation where my religious freedoms can be stripped away from me by my own government. During my RELS390B lecture, Professor Whitaker helped our class understand the impact that the First Amendment has had on the US in contrast to what is happening in China today. The First Amendment states: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” Without it, our right to practice free religion is put in danger. Christian, Jewish, and Muslim groups would most likely not be in the position they are now as the First Amendment made it possible for them to introduce and establish these religious organizations in the United States. In a sense, the article helps illustrate the idea of balancing the influence that religion and politics have on one another. In the case of the new sanctions being imposed in China, the Chinese government has decided to adopt a more tighter relationship between politics and religions by regulating it heavily via government decree. As someone that practices religious activities with his family freely, I feel very strongly about these sanctions as I believe that an individual should be free to practice any religion they want as long as it is not harming anyone. The idea that one would have to seek approval from a department of religious affairs in order to carry out religious activities seems ludicrous in a way. Groups such as the Amish show how some religious communities develop in a manner where they further distance themselves from their government and even the society around them. While on the other hand, groups such Evangelists and Protestants influence American politics on a federal level. The contrast between Democratic and Communistic nations can be seen by their regulations on religious freedom. Communistic governments such as China tend to be more involved with religious practices since power is prioritized to the government rather than the people. American politics are heavily influenced by religious communities due to more power being given to both the people and the government. I am thankful for the First Amendment and realize sometimes we may take it for granted. Hopefully one day we can have a world where anyone can practice any religion they want peacefully.

[lexicaruso1-blog]

Lexi Caruso RELS390B post #1

On ash Wednesday, February 26, 2020,

 I saw the following quote at on a pamphlet at church:

“Help end the #1 killer in the United States...abortion. It kills more annually than cardiovascular disease, HIV/AIDS, murder, and shootings.”

I have been brought up as Catholic my entire life. I was baptized, confirmed and I have received the sacrament of Communion. Throughout elementary school, I dreaded going to CCD every Tuesday night from 6-7 p.m. At that point, I only knew the basics such as Jesus and his resurrection, Noah’s ark, the Virgin Mary, etc. They only taught us literal stories from the bible. Teachers never dove too deep into interpretations. It wasn’t until middle school when I found out about some controversial catholic beliefs regarding pro-life and anti-LGBTQ. At that point, I became confused and began to question the only religion that I knew. I started saying things like, “Yea, I’m catholic...but...I do not agree with all their values.” 

 As we learned in lecture, most Catholics identify with the republican party. Consequently, they typically vote against gay marriage and abortion. Like we learned in class, Catholics are not the only ones who are against abortion. Similarly, although Muslims and African Americans may vote democrat, they remain conservative on views regarding abortion.

With all that being said, I do not agree with the strong relationship between catholicism and political, anti-abortion beliefs. However, I do understand how abortion can clash with some individual people’s morals. Therefore, I don’t think it makes sense when religious views begin to impose on politics. Abortion is a prime example of how religion intersects with politics. The belief that ‘life beings at conception’ is a core Christian belief. Although the word ‘abortion’ is not specifically mentioned in the bible, a short story in Exodus 21:22-25 makes people believe that God is deeming abortion as immoral. The following quote, "And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life, Eye for eye, tooth for tooth . . ." is the focal point guiding the anti-abortion movement. 

Before I get too off-topic, I must refer back to the pamphlet I saw on ash Wednesday. As we were reciting the Our Father prayer, this image of a smiling and healthy baby caught my eye. When I gave it a closer look, I realized the paper was asking for volunteers to join a 40-day Lent promise to petition outside Planned Parenthood...daily. Not only was I disgusted that the church was manipulating people by using an image of a full-grown infant, but, I was infuriated with the fact they wanted to embarrass women who are going to Planned Parenthood for a variety of reasons; not just abortion. Additionally, the provided statistic that abortion is the #1 killer in America is very objective whether one believes life begins at conception or not. If a person is not mentally eligible or financially stable to raise a child, it is their choice whether they want to bring a child into the world that does not have much a chance from the very start. Secondly, rape victims do not deserve to have pregnancy bestowed upon them against their will.

 Abortion is a personal decision. The Catholics may not agree that God granted humanity that choice, but, I do.

[katiecaulfield-blog]

Pew Research Center recently came out with an article debating whether or not President Donald Trump is religious or not. Personally, I always viewed President Trump as a Christian man. I thought it was clear from his conservative views that Trump also held Christian values. A presidents religious association is very important to many American voters, whether they identify as religious or not. This is because religion plays a huge role in politics, whether we like it or not. Everyone taking RELS390B should know that this is the truth- this is the entirety of what we are studying!

When analyzing the data, I was not too surprised with the outcomes. The article states that 62% of Republicans view him as “very” or “somewhat” religious, while only 12% of Democrats interviewed agreed with that statement. I think this comes down to if people are for or against Trump. As we can see, Republicans were five times more likely to view Trump as a religious man, meaning they believe Trump lives his life with religious values close to his heart. On the other hand, only 12% of Democrats believed that. I think this large gap is because Republicans are more likely to be in favor of Trump’s political decisions than Democrats are. Most Democrats view Trump as morally unjust. As a result, they would not draw similarities between religious people and a man who they think has little to no morals.

What I found the most interesting was that 5% of Americans “say Trump’s religion is “something else””. They believe that he worships money, power, or himself. Obviously, these were the extreme answers. They must really dislike Trump as a person and his policies to say such a thing about him. I would guess that they identify as liberal individuals.

This survey perfectly describes what we, RELS390B students are learning from this class. No matter how hard Americans try to separate the two, there will always be a correlation between religion and politics. If someone is a dedicated supporter of Trump and is Christian, they will trust Trump’s word that he is a Christian man. However, if someone is a Christian but despises Trump’s actions and rhetoric, it is very unlikely that they would think Trump is living within the Christian faith. I think this survey is somewhat biased and simply came down to whether or not the person answering the question agreed with Donald Trump’s actions or not. I think Pew Research Center is very credible, but for the people who answered the survey, it is nearly impossible to not have a sense of bias for this question.

Personally, I view Donald Trump as a religious man. Honestly, I do not think anyone has the right to tell another person whether they are religious or not. I define myself as a very devout Catholic, despite the fact that I rarely attend Church. Does this not make me Catholic? No. Nobody knows what Donald Trump does when the cameras are off. He may pray all day. He may have priests over to pray with him once a week. Just like nobody has the right to tell anyone else if they are religious or not, nobody has the right to tell Donald Trump if he is religious or not.

[jsalcedoblog-blog]

[e-jom]

As a person who lives with a family that practices Roman Catholicism, I am generally obligated to attend Sunday mass. Although I do not consider myself a devout Catholic, let alone Christian, I hold the tradition of going to church every Sunday quite seriously as it is one of the only times during the week that I get the opportinity to meet with my local relatives and sing with them. In the face of this COVID-19 epidemic, this routine was put on hold as most (if not all) of the churches in the San Diego area have made the decision to heed the stay-in-shelter order and close their doors during this crisis. Even though I never felt attached to the religious aspects of attending mass, I do sorely miss being able to regularly see the people I’ve become familiar with during my years in attending Sunday mass. 

[carlos37sd-blog]

COVID-19 has affected the everyday lives of all people worldwide. There is no facet of everyday life that this virus hasn’t touched. That includes the religious life of people worldwide. With social distancing rules and regulations, stay-at-home orders, and several lockdowns worldwide, the church lives of practicing, religious people has drastically altered in unforeseen ways. Masses and any type of physical church gathering are all canceled and prohibited, with repercussions also known to be being handed out to priests and religious authorities who violate these rules, in the more serious and rare cases. 

The article explains how Palm Sunday masses are required to be strictly online, whether they be pre-recorded or streamed live. Masses have been strictly online for several weeks now, which happened to fall into the most important time of the year for Catholics, lent and subsequently Easter festivities. This is when church going is at an all time high. Many families choose this time to be especially spiritual, with some choosing this as the only time to go to church for the year. Right now, churches are barron. Churches main form of revenue are from offerings of funds from their members and people observing and practicing in mass. Some priests are forced to do anything they can to keep the doors open.

Many churches are asking the public to consider further donating online to make sure the church can remain open through this pandemic and for the times after. This also threatens the loyalty of people on the cusp of accepting the religion, or it could make the sentiment some people hold of religion worse. There are people who dislike the church because of how they consistently ask for funds, and where it is allocated or used for. This will add fuel to the fire for these people, and it certainly cannot help those struggling in keeping with and practicing the religion.

Delving back into the concept of online mass, the importance of mass, at least in the Catholic church, is to gather as a community before God in His holy building on the holy seventh day, Sunday. This begs the question, is there anything holy about watching mass through a device in your own home? And if there is, what is the importance of physical gatherings? There is a concept of “grace” in Catholicism which is basically how close to God you are. With certain acts one could perform, Catholics believe that God awards “graces” upon you, which result in you becoming closer to him and more holy and ready for eternal life. Attending regular masses is technically a commandment and it is believed to be a serious sin to go against that, but following that commandment also is believed to award graces. Does one receive graces when watching mass online? Catholics are “excused” from attending physical mass, which means that there will be no sin on their soul for missing mass due to COVID-19, but it will never be known if there is any true holiness in online mass, and if there is, what is the future for gathering for mass?     

[jotchis99]

It has become a given in the past 40 years. To win the Republican nomination in the United States in that time span, one must have support of the Evangelical Christian community. From Ronald Reagan to Presidents George H.W. and W. Bush, as well as candidates like Bob Dole, John McCain, and Mitt Romney, the Christian community in the United States has been extremely influential to the Republican Party. Four years ago, when Donald Trump became the front runner, eventual nominee, and eventually the President of the United States, he touted religion on the campaign trail, and that has not stopped since he has taken office. That being said, “…Trump’s personal religious beliefs and practices have not been as public” (Pew Research Center).

 According to a recent study conducted by the Pew Research Center, nearly two thirds (63%) of Americans say that Trump is either not too religious or not religious at all. Trump’s campaign, among other things, was backed by the support of evangelical and religious communities in general, which is somewhat interesting, given the fact that, as previously noted, his own personal religious beliefs have been more of a mystery than anything else. This is so much the case that the study, in fact, points out that “A similar share of Americans see Democratic candidate Bernie Sanders as religious…Americans are more likely to say that Joe Biden, who is Catholic, is at least somewhat religious (55%)” (Pew Research Center).

 Our Religion in American Institutions class has hammered home the point that the Democratic Party has long been the party that sought to represent a separation between church and state. Yet, here is a situation where more Americans find the now-presumptive Democratic Party nominee in November to be more religious than the Republican incumbent. While Joe Biden’s policies towards religion may be more clearly directed in the direction of a separation between church and state, President Trump has in most cases made it clear that he wants faith to be the guiding factor, probably most evident when he named Vice President Mike Pence to be the head of the White House’s COVID-19 Task Force. On a somewhat related note, this same study found that 70% of Americans believe Vice President Pence to be a bit religious, 43% of whom said he’s very religious.

 Probably the most interesting thing about why the evangelicals of this country have at least shown to maintain support for the President are his statements and actions, which have been very contradictory to what the Moral Majority and its associated organizations have come to stand for. Trump, among other things, has been married three separate times, which is very contradictory to the socially conservative beliefs held by evangelicals.

 One thing that may provide an answer to why this support of Trump exists comes from a statement Jerry Falwell made to a journalist about why he supported Ronald Reagan, another President who did not necessarily maintain the religious values held by Falwell and his associates. In a news report done by CNN we viewed in our class, Falwell in essence stated that he was not seeking the election of a “Pastor-in-Chief” but rather wanted someone in the White House who would look out for the interests that the Moral Majority stood for. In this light, it my be easier to understand why Trump gained the support of Evangelicals four years ago and will likely have continued support from them this November, but the whole situation is still very interesting.