What Linda Greenhouse Got Right, and Wrong About Religion in America

Interfaith marchers in Coral Gables, Fla., commemorated 9/11 victims in Sept. 2016. Photo: ImageMD/Shutterstock

Linda Greenhouse’s recent piece “God Has No Place in Supreme Court Opinions” makes a robust case that the new Texas abortion law has no secular basis but can only be read as legislating religion – in her view, a sign of the “theocratizing of America.”  She argues, with obvious passion, that Republican politicians using their religious commitments as the basis for their policy perspective is “letting God into the legislative chamber” in a way that should concern us to our core. 

Is our country lurching towards theocracy, as Greenhouse claims?   

I’m no fan of the new Texas law but it seems to me that Greenhouse is making some key mistakes in her understanding of religion within this argument.  As religious claims take center stage in a variety of issues in public life—not just with regard to abortion legislation, but also vaccine mandates and masking requirements—the strength of our civic discourse depends on having a well-informed perspective on religion in the public square.

Greenhouse’s first mistake is a narrow understanding of what we mean by “religion.” Her concern about religious claims in the public square leaves out other religious folks who draw on their religious traditions but arrive at very different policy conclusions.  Sheila Katz, CEO of the National Council of Jewish Women, grounds her commitment to bodily autonomy in Jewish values: “We believe that since everyone was created in the image of the divine -- b’tzelem elohim -- each person should have full control of their own body, and that doesn’t change with reproductive health.”  While Texas politicians are using Christian language to argue for the new abortion ban, some Christian clergy are taking an active role standing against the abortion law based in their own understanding of Christian tradition. Is this what Greenhouse means when she suggests religion should be banned from public debate? If a Jewish or Christian legislator were to utilize similar religious claims in expressing support for a particular policy end, should those views be similarly banned from public exchange? Greenhouse appears to be conflating “religion” with a particular interpretation of Christianity, and I wonder if her conclusions would differ if she didn’t make this leap.   

Furthermore, it is important to point out that religious freedom law, in fact, upholds the rights of politicians to express religious positions on all kinds of subjects. While Greenhouse cites instances of Democrats assiduously toeing the line between church and state, there are in fact plenty of situations where left-leaning politicians and activists have expressly grounded arguments for their policy goals in religious language, including our current president. Not only is this right protected, both sides historically utilize that right. 

The issue, then, is not the presence of religion in the public square (and Greenhouse’s explicit stance that religion in public life leads to a theocratic threat).  Instead, the question before us is how to express those religious commitments within in a pluralistic society.

This is a question with some history in political philosophy, as well. Leading philosophers, such as John Rawls, Richard Rorty and Jeffrey Stout, contend with the challenge of religion in public life at some length, each arriving at somewhat different conclusions. Stout’s “Democracy and Traditionprovides the most useful framework in my mind, defending the importance of religious claims in the public square and indeed, underscoring how fundamental diversity of perspectives are to the democratic project:  “(Democracy) takes for granted that reasonable people will differ in their conceptions of piety, in their grounds for hope, in their ultimate concerns, and in their speculations about salvation. Yet it holds that people who differ on such matters can still exchange reasons with one another intelligibly, cooperate in crafting political arrangements that promote justice and decency in their relations with one another, and do both of these things without compromising their integrity.”

This is why religious diversity is such an important American strength. Rather than operating from a narrow understanding of what “religion” is, we should understand that we are, in fact, a religiously diverse society, and that that very diversity provides us the opportunity to fulfill a higher democratic aspiration. To my mind, rather than attempting to limit religious influence in the public square, we should instead embrace it as an opportunity for a more capacious public discourse.  However, asserting the value of religious expression in public comes with a key additional understanding – America is a nation of religious diversity. No one religious (or non-religious) expression trumps another, no one commitment carries greater weight than another.  America’s religious diversity allows us to express our deeply held values commitment in public. It also requires us to take other, divergent perspectives just as seriously. 

Greenhouse’s basic frustration is about the presence of one expression of Christianity in the legislative process.  Her solution, it seems, is to uphold a firm barrier between religious expression and the policy process.  That solution grants primacy to one religious interpretation, rather than allowing for a growing set of religiously diverse voices to add to a broader conversation that might steer the discourse in different directions.  

This solution fails to leverage the great possibility of our religious diversity.  Leaning into the strength of America’s religious diversity requires us all to contend with the reality of divergent, and equally valuable, religiously and ethically grounded claims around issues of common concern. 

 

If you are looking for a way to become an interfaith leader, work for racial equity and build bridges, please check out our free curriculum "We Are Each Other's" and start your interfaith leadership today

more from IFYC

One third of Americans don’t identify as Christian. IFYC VP Amber Hacker explains how to offer a more equitable approach to time off.
Are Gen Z protestors inspired by spiritual concerns? Are or they indifferent to religion and spirituality? A recent study sheds some light.
Joe Biden is only the second Catholic president of the United States, after John F. Kennedy, and displays his faith openly, often wearing a rosary and attending Mass routinely. This will be his first encounter with Francis since becoming president.
The 17 kidnapped adults and children are from Amish, Mennonite and other Anabaptist Christian communities in Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, Tennessee, Pennsylvania, Oregon and Ontario, Canada. 
My cousin, a prayer leader in the Ismaili Muslim community, served at the center of civic and communal life. In mourning his death, we are reminded of what faith communities and religious traditions do so well.
Our top 10 picks feature a guide to interfaith workplaces, a reflection on how the 'Dune' novel draws on Islamic motifs, and an interfaith friendship in Mr. Rogers' neighborhood.
"It should be no surprise that I think religion is essential" to being inclusive, IFYC founder Eboo Patel writes. "What struck me is the number of other people who seemed to agree."
Religious leaders called on President Joe Biden and congressional lawmakers to pass the John Lewis Act and other voting rights legislation.
"I want to do the work of a theologian that takes seriously reading Black texts as sacred texts and Black life as sacred history," Stewart said.
Pope Francis has turned Twitter into a prophetic medium. It is his way of getting the Gospel message out to the world.
The Duniverse, as some fans call it, is heavily influenced by ecology and sociology — as well as imagery from the Islamic world and the Middle East.
The gathering was one stop on a spiritual convoy to San Francisco, where a court will hear an appeal the group has filed to keep land in Arizona from being transferred to a mining company.
University leaders say they will use the gift to fund new faculty positions and build laboratories. Calvin is affiliated with the Christian Reformed Church, a small denomination based in Grand Rapids, Michigan.
Our top 10 religion stories ask: Can college kids get along? Does "Midnight Mass" respect religion? And is there a Torah of Ted Lasso?
The expansion is fueled by concerns over political polarization on college campuses, an infusion of funds from foundations interested in bridge-building, and a merger with IFYC, which has a track record facilitating interfaith engagement.
The home temple, or puja mandir, has been part of Hindu culture for centuries. Even for those who are not very religious, it can be a space for meditation and reflection.
Feeling broken and betrayed by God after her son Beau died, the First Lady said her spirits lifted inside a Baptist church. "I felt for the first time that there was a path for my recovering my faith."
Applications open October 1, and grants are available to educators doing important work that engages religious diversity to combat systemic racism, inside and outside the classroom.
On loan from the Library of Congress, the historic English-language Quran, printed in London in 1764, will be the first object in a display that honors U.S. founding principles.
Ancient rabbis imagined the great chain of tradition, that went from generation to generation, as a ball that is tossed, playfully, from teacher to student. Is there a "Lasso Torah" inside a television show about a fish-out-of-water Midwestern football coach?
Studies show houses of worship have provided solace during the pandemic, but companies across the U.S. are struggling to respond to requests for religious exemptions to vaccine mandates.

The opinions contained in this piece are solely the author’s and do not necessarily reflect the views of Interfaith Youth Core. Interfaith America encourages a wide range of views and strives to maintain a respectful tone with a goal of greater understanding and cooperation between people of different faiths, worldviews, and traditions.