Why Don't Democrats Take Religion Seriously?

Many religious voters feel alienated from the Democratic Party, says Atlantic staff writer Emma Green. Why haven’t liberals tried harder to reach the broad percentage of Americans who identify as religious? “Democrats in Washington often have trouble speaking in religious terms, and they reflect a broader liberal culture that doesn’t take religion seriously,” she explains. But this is an uncomfortable shift, one that has a political costs. Previous progressive figures have actively relied on religious rhetoric to move policies forward. Martin Luther King Jr. and Jimmy Carter, for example, framed their ideals in religious terms and audiences were receptive. Is it time for Democrats to incorporate religious identity back into their outreach and politics?

Welcome to Unpresidented, a new series from The Atlantic where writers explore different aspects of this new era in American politics. Comment with questions and suggestions for topics to cover.

EDITOR'S NOTE: Graphics in this video show symbols of many faiths, including a Star of David. One image of that star, associated with Judaism, originally contained a cross—a combination typically associated with a movement known as Messianic Judaism, whose adherents identify as Jewish believers in Jesus. We have replaced the original symbol with a standard Star of David in certain parts of the video, including the image at the beginning.

Follow Emma @emmaogreen

And subscribe to The Atlantic! New videos every week:

[pamelacox]

Our government is founded on the principle of separation of church and state. As a Christian I have absolutely no problem with this. The difference between Democrat and Republican people of faith? May be that Republicans seem to want to create a theocracy according to their interpretation of Christianity. I say their interpretation because no where in my faith is greed, cruelty and hatred celebrated.

[POSTapocalypseSHOW]

I disagree that the Democrats should be a party of belief. Just because America harbors a large population of Christians does not require both parties to be pro belief. Secular government is important to many voters, Christians included.

[calmorgan]

Pretty irritating the way this piece solely relates religion with morality: secular doesn't mean immoral.

[steveprice]

Gotta be honest, I both enjoyed and appreciated this take. As a person of faith, I've come to feel ostracized in political discourse, caught between two parties that either don't speak for me or don't seem to want me. It creates a very difficult milieu where the only safe play is not to get involved at all.

[Mark-ecix]

I agree republicans love Jesus, until it comes time to practice his teachings. Then not so much.

[Argonaut]

"Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false and by the rulers as useful". Seneca, Roman orator, philosopher and historian, c.37 B.C.

[IsaiahReitanFilm]

If you bring up the "God's not dead" movie to argue anything then you've automatically lost. Sorry.

[rolandotillit]

The government should be secular, there should be a divide between religion and politics

[JordanMagill]

These comments make a pretty strong case for the point of this video. She never said Democrats should be more Christian, or capitulate their views to the whims of religious audiences, only that they should take religion seriously because many Americans are religious, and Democrats ought to be able to speak to all kinds of folks in order to build bridges and get more done. It's politically advantageous, and it honors the dignity of the many, many religious folks in our country who aren't just going away because some people find their views backward. Should Christian voters be able to force their beliefs on others? No. Should Democrats take people of faith seriously because there are many of them and Democrats purport to believe in pluralism? Yes.

[visceratrocar]

Like this is a bad thing...this government was not founded on religious values and politicians don't have any business imposing religious law. Not everyone practices the same faith and can't be judged by the same tenants. Would you tell a Sikh to take off his turban in a christian church to be respectful (I'm assuming churches hold open house events)? Would you force a Christian to prostrate himself on the ground to pray? This isn't about belief. My internal sincerely held beliefs don't effect your life. No, this is about justifying discrimination and controlling the masses. Sorry, Evangelicals, but Christianity is NOT the state religion and never will be. No one is obligated to worship Jesus. Accept it.

[periodikoSF]

i'd like to point out that 60% of white catholics voting Trump is actually less or roughly the same as whites for trump overall (~63%). also, as the video points out, racial minority religious people go for Democrats by large margins. so is the problem with 'religion', or is the problem with a particular culture of white, protestant, predominately evangelical christians?

i think framing this as a problem with 'religion' is a mistake, and kind of whitewashes things.

[nsytr]

Let religion deal with "other worldly" affairs, keep politics secular.
Politics shouldn't have the escape of "the after-life", it needs to have the pressure of death.

[moelevinerules]

Why does anyone take religion seriously? It’s ridiculous that non-religious men and women are portrayed as strange and outliers. The existence of god is just as irrational as the existence of Zeus. Yet, somehow the device of religion allows many to portray themselves as inherently generous, kind, moral, and ethical—which we know is very far from the truth.

[SkiDaBird]

She has a point about being ignorant of and even mocking religion. Bill Maher can be funny at times, but he drives people away because of his language.

[marcusr]

We already have one party of religion--we don't need two.

[JBanchiere]

This notion that we need to address god and religion in politics to "include" voters is absurd. It's also arrogant. I have never heard a Christian nor Christian politician make any effort to live in the shoes of a non-believer and empathize with them (or Jews or Muslims for that matter). In fact, the opposite is true. They make absolutist pronouncements that atheists are morally deficient. Atheists are one of the most distrusted groups in America. We're more distrusted than rapists... It's strange that the "secular" party of the democrats is more inclined to include people from all religions, and no religions, more readily. Simply because from their pov, it shouldn't matter. Isn't that what a party of true inclusion would look like?

But what bothers me is your smarmy tone. As someone who views Christians as having a super-majority of influence and almost never tries to see through the lens of other groups, it's kind of infuriating.

The most defensible position a politician could hold in regards to religion should be, "It doesn't matter, you have the right to believe what you choose". But in a society dominated by one particular religion, it's insulting to to ask those minorities to "imagine what life for us is like?". We know. It's shoved in our faces every minute of every day.

[h.schuylerhalsey]

I think it’s important to note that the radical messages of the Abrahamic faiths (and other traditions) for charity, inclusion, and love are antithetical to the neoliberal capitalist economic goals. Where religion (often) calls for us to raise up those in need the American political system wishes for the rich to get richer.

[rogershuttleworth]

Oh. It hurts the feelings of religious people that so many people don't take their faith seriously? Would it make them feel better if we all just pretended that we took their faith seriously, just to humor them?

[martinschmid]

They talk about it like it's a bad thing for a party to be secular. Including all religions might be the goal, but being rather irreligious is still better than favoring one set of beliefs and values over all the other interpretations.

[DavidAmann]

The summary of this is wrong: It should be said, "Many *white* religious voters feel alienated... Religious African-American and Hispanic-American vote Democratic and have no problem bringing religious metaphors and language into the political conversation. Please do better, editors of The Atlantic.