By Sol Lilman
Christian Nationalism distorts both the Christian faith and the founding ideals of the United States by claiming that the U.S. has been and should be a Christian nation and opposing perspectives should be vilified. In this attempt to assert economic and political power for a chosen few, Christian nationalists often rely on authoritarian strategies to achieve their vision of a Christian state. This becomes especially evident in debates around family, gender and youth.
Karen Stenner, a political scientist specializing in political psychology, defined authoritarianism in The Authoritarian Dynamic (2014) as a form of intolerance in which one person prefers homogeneity over diversity. While many people have these tendencies, they stay dormant until triggered by something seen as threatening, like negative portrayals of minority groups. Stenner calls this process the authoritarian dynamic, helping to explain how perceived societal threats can lead to reactionary, authoritarian (i.e., intolerant), and exclusionary politics, which we see in today’s Christian Nationalist movement.
The Religious Right in the United States has long organized around politics of gender, sexuality and family. After World War II, the nuclear family – consisting of two cisgender, heterosexual parents and their children – became the standard white Americans. Efforts to impose it – such as banning gay marriage and ostracizing nontraditional family structures typically belonging to people of color – position it as morally superior. Other types of families are deemed dangerous and immoral. The family became a site of white sexual politics, as well as a symbol of the United States’ stability and order. Today, as diverse family structures become more visible, Christian Nationalists see these changes as threats to both family and nation. This drives them to promote conformity through public opinion and laws.
For example, Christian Nationalists are pushing legislation requiring a Protestant-aligned version of the Ten Commandments to be displayed in public schools. Last year, Republican Gov. Jeff Landry of Louisiana signed a law mandating that the Ten Commandments be displayed in every public school classroom. He claimed, “If you want to respect the rule of law, you have to start from the original lawgiver, which was Moses.” This argument suggests that respect for law requires following a particular religious tradition. Regardless of intent, the law excludes people of other or no faiths while appealing to those fearing moral decline.
This messaging has powerful emotional effects. Imagine someone with little exposure to diversity who trusts their governor. They may begin to view unfamiliar religious beliefs as dangerous and immoral. This process – an authority figure communicating discriminatory messages – triggers authoritarian, or intolerant, feelings. The person might then support discriminatory practices out of fear or rejection of what they deem immoral. At the same time, they find comfort in the religious views promoted by the government. In the context of white Christian Nationalism, this reinforces a vision of the United States as a homogenous entity that privileges the white, conservative, Christian identity while marginalizing opposing or diverse views. People’s intolerance is legitimized and justified.
Another example is the reactionary response to the growing transgender visibility. Christian Nationalists often accuse transgender people of advancing a problematic “gender ideology.” For them, heterosexuality and being cisgender are not just moral but stabilizing, essential forces. Any departure from these norms is seen as threatening both personally and politically. By deeming a narrow definition of family and gender as ideal, Christian Nationalists create a cause that authoritarian people in power can exploit. Queer people, because they exist outside of these norms, disrupt the idea of only one correct moral and social order. They make space for diversity and present many alternatives to normative ways of life, meaning that many Christian Nationalists’ rhetoric is weakened, and their control slips.
The mixing of family politics and control is especially clear in the ways Christian Nationalists have focused their attacks on transgender youth. Oklahoma Superintendent of Public Instruction Ryan Walters said that it is “dangerous for student athletes, allowing boys into girls’ sports,” implying that exclusivity and forced conformity protects youth instead. There is no room for other perspectives and options. Later, he admitted to not recognizing the existence of transgender people: “There’s not multiple genders. There’s two. That’s how God created us.” This kind of language spreads fear and intolerance while shaping policy. Christian Nationalism relies on the authoritarian dynamic: it triggers fear, claims to protect children, and portrays diversity as dangerous.
Religious freedom suffers when one religious interpretation is placed above all others. When political leaders use Christian Nationalist rhetoric to advance legislation, they blur the line between church and state and weaponize religion to marginalize those who do not conform. In doing so, it creates a culture of intolerance, division, and exclusion. Advocating against authoritarianism and advocating for the separation of church and state must go hand in hand.
Sol Lilman served as an outreach and legal intern with Americans United this summer.
