
The Christian Right Is Dead. The Religious Right Killed It.
The first story is the one we conservative evangelicals told ourselves: Religious conservatism arose as a force in the United States in response to the hedonism of the sexual revolution, the cultural intolerance of the New Left and the threat of the Soviet Union, an explicitly atheistic, Marxist empire.
According to this narrative, the Supreme Court's decision in Roe v. Wade in 1973 was the seminal domestic event that inspired Christian conservatism. It represented a deadly corruption of our Constitution in service of a culture of sexual convenience in which human life was subordinate to sexual pleasure.
The response of the Christian right was both political and personal. That approach could be boiled down to a single sentence: Elect people of good personal character who will defend human life and religious liberty.
The movement placed a heavy emphasis on constitutional fidelity, seeing the Constitution as a bulwark against authoritarian overreach. And during Bill Clinton's presidency it staked out the clearest possible ground on personal character.
As the Southern Baptist Convention declared at its annual meeting in 1998, 'We urge all Americans to embrace and act on the conviction that character does count in public office, and to elect those officials and candidates who, although imperfect, demonstrate consistent honesty, moral purity and the highest character.'
Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Hill
17 minutes ago
- The Hill
GOP senators urge White House to release delayed NIH funding
Sen. Katie Britt (R-Ala.) and 13 other Senate Republicans are urging the Trump administration to release National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding that has been held up for months. The GOP senators warned in a letter to White House budget chief Russell Vought that the 'slow disbursement of funds' that Congress appropriated in March 'risks undermining critical research and the thousands of American jobs it supports.' 'Suspension of these appropriated funds — whether formally withheld or functionally delayed — could threaten Americans' ability to access better treatments and limit our nation's leadership in biomedical science,' the senators warned. 'It also risks inadvertently severing ongoing NIH-funded research prior to actionable results,' they wrote. The Trump administration suspended or cut many NIH research grants earlier this year in order to undertake a thorough review to ensure they complied with Trump's orders to end federal support for diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs. A database set up by a Harvard University researcher estimated that by the end of May more than 2,100 NIH grants worth more than $9 billion had been cancelled. NIH Director Jay Bhattacharya told senators in March at his confirmation hearing that his agency would restart grant reviews but an analysis by STAT, a health care news site, last month found that NIH had made little progress in narrowing the funding gap created by the freeze on grant approvals. Now Republican senators are trying to ramp up pressure on the Office of Management and Budget. They told Vought that they share his commitment to ensuring NIH funds are 'used responsibly and not diverted to ideological or unaccountable programs.' But they also argued that starving the NIH of funding could inadvertently undermine trust in the agency. 'Withholding or suspending these funds would jeopardize that trust and hinder progress on critical health challenges facing our nation. Ultimately, this is about finding cures and seeing them through to fruition,' the senators wrote. 'We respectfully request that you ensure the timely release of all FY25 NIH appropriations in accordance with congressional intent,' they added. The other GOP signatories were Sens. John Boozman (Ark.), Shelley Moore Capito ( Bill Cassidy (La.), Susan Collins (Maine), Lindsey Graham (S.C.), David McCormick (Pa.), Mitch McConnell (Ky.), Jerry Moran (Kansas), Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), Thom Tillis (N.C.), Todd Young (Ind.), Dan Sullivan (Alaska) and Tim Scott (S.C.).


Boston Globe
17 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Man sues over girlfriend's abortion in a first-of-its-kind lawsuit
Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Orchestrating the effort is Jonathan Mitchell, a conservative attorney who helped construct Texas's 'heartbeat' law, the most restrictive abortion measure passed before Roe's fall. The lawsuit Mitchell set in motion alleges that the doctor violated the Comstock Act, a 19th century federal law that bans the mailing of 'obscene' materials, including abortion-related materials. Now in a post-Roe era, Democratic lawmakers and abortion advocates have worried that the government would invoke Comstock to ban medication abortion, which accounts for most abortions in the United States. Advertisement The case is a new approach alleging state and federal law violations - filed in federal, rather than state court - though it's too early to tell how viable that strategy will be. Advertisement 'This very much has the feeling of taking matters into your own hands,' said Mary Ziegler, a professor of law at the University of California at Davis. The plaintiff, Jerry Rodriguez, is suing California-based physician Remy Coeytaux for more than $75,000. Rodriguez, who stated that he is suing on behalf of 'all current and future fathers of unborn children,' is asking the court for an order blocking Coeytaux from mailing abortion pills. His complaint adds that he plans to sue the manufacturers and distributors of the abortion pills if they are identified during discovery. Coeytaux did not respond to a request for comment from The Washington Post, and it was unclear whether he had retained an attorney as of Thursday. In Texas, women who get an abortion cannot be prosecuted. But antiabortion activists in the state have publicly sought out men who are willing to bring cases against people who helped their partners have an abortion. Mitchell, who declined to comment Wednesday, has represented men in at least two similar cases out of Texas, both filed in state court. In a 2023 lawsuit, a man alleged that three women helped his ex-wife get abortion pills to end her pregnancy. That case was later dropped. In May 2024, Mitchell helped a man file a petition to investigate an ex-partner's out-of-state abortion, setting up for a wrongful-death lawsuit. In the new federal court complaint, filed Sunday, Rodriguez alleges that Coeytaux mailed abortion pills to his girlfriend's estranged husband in September 2024. The pair were not divorced when Rodriguez and the woman began dating but were already legally separated, according to the lawsuit. Rodriguez's girlfriend, whom The Post is not naming because she is not a plaintiff and to protect her privacy, took abortion pills on two occasions, once in September and another in January, to end two pregnancies after her estranged husband and mother 'pressured her,' according to the complaint. On Monday, Rodriguez filed a separate wrongful-death lawsuit in state court against the estranged husband and mother; Mitchell is also representing him in that case. Few details of the relationships between Rodriguez, his girlfriend, her mother and her estranged husband are included in the lawsuit. According to Rodriguez's complaints, his girlfriend is now pregnant again. Advertisement Since the Supreme Court in 2022 struck down the constitutional right to the procedure, the number of abortions has increased, bolstered by medication abortions enabled by telehealth, data shows. In an attempt to thwart that access, officials in red states are launching attacks on the shield laws in blue states that keep the pills flowing across the country. Texas and Louisiana are pursuing legal action against a New York doctor accused of prescribing abortion pills to patients in those states, which both ban nearly all abortions. To the frustration of prosecutors, New York officials have refused to comply, citing the state's shield law. As a result, the conservative strategy to punish providers had slowed in state courts, though experts say the cases could end up on the Supreme Court's docket and ultimately reshape medication abortion access. In the meantime, the federal lawsuit has emerged as a new method to potentially curb abortion access. Carmel Shachar, a law professor at Harvard Law School, said the case designed by Mitchell uses a different legal framework, but the end goal remains the same - to 'close that telehealth loophole.' Advertisement


Buzz Feed
an hour ago
- Buzz Feed
Americans, Tell Us A Norm That's Actually Dystopian
Listen, I'm an American, and I've read enough dystopian books to know that some things about the US are almost too similar for my taste — especially right now. So, if you're American, what's something considered totally normal in the US but is actually pretty dystopian the more you think about it? To rip the Band-Aid off, maybe you still, to this day, can't wrap your head around the fact that the regulation of women's bodies has been a long-time (and still!) discussed topic among politicians and how it pertains to "the law." To you, the idea of the government dictating what women can and can't do with their bodies is deeply upsetting. Maybe you find it extremely disturbing and repulsive how normalized mass shootings in America have become, and how many shootings Americans have had to grieve through. Maybe you're still shell-shocked when you see how normalized it's become to wear merch of the President, and how some loyalists believe that the current president can do no wrong. Or maybe you literally can't stop thinking about income inequality and how the wealthy and powerful have a lot more access to necessities that should be considered basic — particularly when it comes to healthcare. Americans, how are we holding up? If you're American, what normal aspect of the US do you find is actually pretty dystopian? Let me know in the comments, or you can anonymously submit your thoughts using the form below!