The Republican Divide

The Republican Party is experiencing an enormous divide and Christians are at the center of it.

Welcome back to The Burnett Breakdown- a weekly newsletter that discusses politics from a conservative, Christian perspective. Please like, subscribe, share, and comment if you enjoy the newsletter.

The Rise of Nonchurch Goers

The Republican Party has changed. Drastically. This has been a common theme in my newsletter since I started writing it. The party is no longer the same party as it was in the 1980s when it was closely aligned with the conservative movement under Reagan. (If you want to know my thoughts on the difference between conservative and Republican, then here is a newsletter I wrote explaining it).

Typically, I focus on the policy differences between the Reagan-led Republican Party and the Trump-led Republican Party- entitlement spending, tariffs, foreign policy, regard for the Constitution, etc. While those policy differences are ultimately what matters, I want to turn my attention today to thinking about why this shift has taken place and what that forbodes about the future.

I would never claim that this is a monocausal explanation for the shift, but the composition of the Republican Party is an important factor in this shift. In particular, the religiosity of the Republican Party.

The Washington Post recently published a pretty staggering chart in an article by David Byler that showcases the changing demographics of the Republican Party. (This comes from an article that is well worth the read).

As you can see, the percentage of Republicans that attend church weekly has dropped in no small measure over the last decade and a half, while the percentage of Republicans that seldom or never attend church has jumped. That doesn’t mean that self-described atheists are joining the party though.

Byler writes, “This isn’t to say that Republicans are giving up on faith. Nine in 10 Republicans believe in God, and 87 percent say the Bible is either the literal or ‘inspired’ word of God.” In other words, a large percentage of Republicans still claim to be evangelical Christians but are going to church much less now than ever.

Weekly church attendance is a much more accurate way of identifying how Christian the Republican Party is than self-identifying data since anyone can claim to be Christian regardless of their desire to conform their lives to Scripture. If someone is unwilling to attend church regularly, then I question how seriously “Christian” they are.

It shouldn’t be surprising that the decline in religion, something so important in defining values and worldviews to people, has led to a shift in policy focus. For example, the less frequently a Trump supporter attended the church, the more important building a border wall was to them.

Likewise, the less frequently a Trump voter attended church, the more likely they were to view the economy as favoring the wealthiest.

The emphasis placed on combatting illegal immigration and woke corporations within the Republican Party now is a reflection of the increasing power of nonchurchgoers within the party.

Even before these issues rose to the forefront of the party, the willingness to fight against gay marriage waned in the Republican Party, especially after Obergefell v. Hodges declared gay marriage a constitutional right. It makes sense that as nonchurchgoers become more prominent within the Republican Party, the willingness to fight for the Biblical definition of marriage declined.

Future

Identifying the cause of the policy differences within the Republican Party is interesting, but I am more interested in what this forbodes for the Republican Party in the future. I think one safe assumption to make is that, apart from a religious revival, the trend will continue. Nonchuchgoeres will become more prominent in the Republican Party and the power of churchgoers will decline.

As is the case with other parties that have different factions, this will lead to an intense focus on those issues that unified churchgoers and nonchurchgoers and downplaying those issues that divide them.

We’ll start with what unifies these two factions: opposition to woke ideology.

The first element of this is an intense focus and opposition to the transgender movement. Churchgoers and nonchurchgoers alike can see the nonsense and depravity that consumes the transgender movement, especially its approach to children. Statistically, I can’t imagine that “drag queen story hours” are really that common across the United States, but they receive disproportionate attention because it keeps churchgoers and nonchurchgoers unified.

Similarly, the divisiveness of ideologies such as Critical Race Theory (as it is popularly understood, not the academic, technical definition) being taught in schools will continue to be a flashpoint that these two groups stand together to oppose. Theoretically, I can see this making a policy issue such as school choice one of the core pillars of the Republican Party going forward.

(I say theoretically because school choice would allow tax dollars to go towards families that want to send their child to a school that teaches CRT and gender ideology. While I believe this is just the reality of living in a pluralistic society, I am not so sure others will feel that way. This could result in “school choice” turning into merely fighting over who gets the power to determine which schools are acceptable to receive tax dollars and which schools are not.)

While I agree with most of the opposition to woke ideology as an intellectual matter, I am a lot less willing to give the government power it needs to stamp out those ideas. I think this comes from my realization that Orthodox Christianity is becoming less popular which makes protection from governmental intervention all the more important. Since nonchurchgoers are less likely to see that as important, their willingness to use governmental power to stamp out ideas that they disagree with, like woke ideology, could lead to divisions between churchgoers and nonchurchgoers further down the line.

This potentially divisive issue pales in comparison to the main issue that I think (and hope) will end up being too divisive for churchgoers and nonchurchgoers to remain in the same party: abortion.

For the past few decades, the pro-life movement, led primarily by devoted Christians, has worked hand-in-hand with the Republican Party as it was mutually beneficial. The pro-life movement used the Republican Party to fill judicial vacancies with legal conservatives and the Republican Party could bank on pro-lifers to support them in elections. With the growing divide between churchgoers and nonchurchgoers, I have my doubts that this marriage will last much longer.

Before Roe v. Wade was overturned, it was easy for Republicans to pass anti-abortion laws as they would be ruled unconstitutional and not go into effect. Voters who either were not pro-life or didn’t particularly care about abortion didn’t have to actually think about the effects of these anti-abortion laws. That has changed with the overturning of Roe v. Wade. Now, those anti-abortion laws that states passed or are attempting to pass have real-world consequences that voters have to take into account.

It turns out that the pro-life position isn’t necessarily a popular one even in predominantly Republican states. Anti-abortion ballot initiatives in states such as Kansas and Montana (not known for their progressive politics) failed to pass and a recent judicial election in Wisconsin that was basically a battle over abortion did not go the way of pro-lifers. Democrats, realizing abortion is a drag on the Republican Party, have increasingly tried to make abortion the key issue in elections as they believe it gives them the best chance of winning. It’s hard to imagine the Republican Party downplaying abortion or shifting away from the pro-life position if it continues to cost them elections.

Meanwhile, churchgoers have been the core of the pro-life movement for decades and are unlikely (hopefully) to change their stance. This is particularly true if churches across the country continue to conduct sanctity of life services as many do every year.

In fact, abortion has been a line in the sand for many Christians such as myself. I will never vote for a candidate that supports or refuses to do anything about the murder of the most vulnerable among us. So far, pro-lifers haven’t had to refuse to vote for a Republican for that reason, but, with the continued dominance of nonchurchgoers in the Republican Party, pro-lifers may face that decision sooner than they think.

My hope is that devoted Christians who value life will refuse to support any candidate that does not advocate for the pro-life position even if that candidate is Republican.

For a long time, the Republican Party has been largely composed of churchgoing Christians and the policies of the party have reflected this group. As America has grown less religious, the composition of the Republican Party has as well. The vast majority of Republicans may say that they believe in God and/or the Bible is the inerrant word of God, but they are less willing to regularly attend church than ever before making nonchurchgoers a majority in the party.

As a result, the priorities and policies of the Republican Party have changed and will continue to change in the future. Opposition to woke ideology will continue to be the main focus of the Republican Party, uniting the two factions, as the pro-life position on abortion falls by the wayside. If I am right, then committed pro-life Christians will soon face a time for choosing: are they more committed to pro-life policies or the Republican Party?

God Bless,

Hunter Burnett