The ‘holy war’: How the far right is trying to hijack Christianity

Left Foot Forward

Gabrielle Pickard-Whitehead 

Yesterday

Right-Wing Watch

Does the far right’s capture of a debased Christianity matter in the UK, where religion holds far less sway than in the US? Given America’s superpower status, and the reluctance of global leaders to challenge Trump, it should concern us all.

Whatever happened to “love thy neighbour,” the foundational Christian principle Jesus identified as the second greatest commandment? In the Gospels, loving one’s neighbour, and even one’s enemies, are central to the faith’s moral vision of compassion, mercy and peace.

Yet in Tommy Robinson’s version of Christianity that ethic is turned upside down. This week, the far-right activist, long associated with divisive and anti-immigrant messaging, celebrated the US military’s controversial operation in Venezuela and called on Donald Trump to “free us” by invading the UK and removing prime minister Keir Starmer.

Trump’s raid in Venezuela, which led to the capture and extradition of President Nicolás Maduro, has been widely condemned as illegal and a breach of international law. Robinson’s comments were criticised as contradictory for professing patriotism while inviting foreign military action on British soil.

This is the man who, in 2025, began promoting himself as a Christian, organising “Unite the Kingdom” rallies and Christmas carol services centred on Christian themes.

Yet just as the sincerity of his patriotism has been questioned, so too has the authenticity of his newly professed faith.

Following a far-right rally led by Robinson in London last September, bishops, former Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, and leaders from the Methodist, Baptist, Evangelical, Salvation Army and Catholic traditions, wrote an open letter, condemning the use of Christian symbols. They said they were “deeply concerned about the co-opting of Christian symbols, particularly the cross,” warning that elements of the march contained “racist, anti-Muslim and far-right” themes.

“As Christians from different theological and political backgrounds we stand together against the misuse of Christianity,” they wrote.

Billionaire influence

Tommy Robinson isn’t the only figure on the British right to invoke Christianity while promoting views many Christians regard as deeply un-Christian.

Sir Paul Marshall, the billionaire financier and major investor in right-wing media outlets, including GB News, the Spectator and UnHerd, is a prominent Christian philanthropist. He sits on the board of the Church Revitalisation Trust, which describes its mission as contributing to “the evangelisation of the nations, the revitalisation of the Church and the transformation of society.”

Yet Marshall’s public conduct has drawn scrutiny. He has been accused of supporting extremist voices on social media, raising questions about his suitability for media ownership.

The anti-extremism group Hope Not Hate has pointed to posts he has liked or shared on X, accusing him of endorsing “extreme Islamophobic and anti-migrant activists” and holding “deeply disturbing views of modern Britain.”

Among the content were claims that Europe is heading for civil war because “native European populations” are losing patience with “fake refugee invaders,” and that societies cannot remain peaceful once Muslim populations reach a certain size.

The framing of entire communities as existential threats sits uneasily alongside Christian teachings on human dignity, peace and the welcoming of the stranger, raising questions about how faith is being mobilised in contemporary right-wing politics.

‘Republican Jesus’

As so often when examining the actions of the right, the trail leads us to the United States. There, the rise of self-identified Christians who enthusiastically support Donald Trump raises an unavoidable question: how can a movement that proclaims Jesus Christ as its saviour so readily endorse policies that contradict the values he is said to embody?

Consider the sickening news emerging from Minneapolis this week. Renee Good, a mother of three and a US citizen, was gunned down in cold blood, in broad daylight, by agents of Trump’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Reports also indicate that at least two pastors were shoved and exposed to pepper spray while protesting the actions of federal immigration agents in the city.

After reporting that its pastor had been detained by ICE, the Metropolitan Community Church (MCC) denomination condemned the violence. In a statement, it said that “… the violence of shooting a woman sitting in her own car, the detention of a clergy person who is protesting peacefully by a masked and unidentifiable officer, are all outrages against a just and caring society,”“As MCC, we are committed to resisting the structures that oppress people and to standing with those who suffer under the weight of oppressive systems.”

Critics argue that such events expose the rise of a politicised figure sometimes dubbed “Republican Jesus,” a reimagined Christ invoked to oppose social welfare, sanctify nationalism, justify harsh immigration regimes, and celebrate military power.

One such critic is Stephen Mattson, author of The Great Reckoning: Surviving a Christianity That Looks Nothing Like Christ. Writing for Christians for Social Action, Mattson captures the depth of these contradictions:

“There’s a religion whose savior was a refugee, yet it rejects refugees. Whose God embraces sojourners, yet it deports immigrants. Whose parishioners worship someone called the Prince of Peace, yet they defend violence and are pro-war. Whose hero was an ethnic minority, yet they’re complicit in white supremacy… There’s a popular type of “Christianity” that wants nothing to do with Christ other than to use His namesake to promote its own agendas.”

This is not merely hypocrisy but theological inversion. That inversion was on display this week as Trump hailed the seizure of Nicolás Maduro as “brilliant,” despite reports that dozens of Venezuelan and Cuban security personnel were killed during the operation.

The question is, who is funding right-wing Christian messaging?

Trump’s Christian ‘legal army’

Two US organisations closely linked to Donald Trump have played a major role in funding and exporting Christian nationalist ideology and conservative culture-war activism, the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) and the American Centre for Law and Justice (ACLJ). Both use strategic litigation to oppose LGBTQ+ rights and abortion access.

ADF was co-founded by US Christian right leader Alan Sears, who co-authored a book attacking “the homosexual agenda.” The ACLJ was founded in 1990 by televangelist Pat Robertson to counter the American Civil Liberties Union.

An openDemocracy investigation found that between 2008 and 2019 the two groups spent over $20 million in Europe, signalling a concerted effort to export US Christian nationalist priorities.

Britain, in particular, appears to be viewed as fertile ground.

Since 2020, ADF has more than doubled its UK spending and quadrupled its British team. After helping engineer the overturning of Roe v. Wade and repeatedly challenging LGBTQ+ rights in the US, ADF is now deploying the same legal tactics in Britain, including backing Christians prosecuted for breaching abortion clinic buffer zones.

Vladimir Putin and the ‘holy war’

If Trump exemplifies “Republican Jesus,” Vladimir Putin offers a parallel model. In 2014, Putin appeared on the cover of Decision, an American evangelical magazine, with a cover story written by conservative pastor Franklin Graham, who praised Putin’s signing legislation restricting LGBTQ+ expression. The issue was published just as Russian troops were moving into Crimea.

Interestingly, the ACLJ operates an affiliated office in Moscow, the Slavic Center for Law and Justice, which also praised Vladimir Putin’s laws banning so-called “gay propaganda,”

Graham visited Russia in 2015, and ever since, has promoted Putin as a godly leader. Days before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, he urged people to ‘pray for Putin,’ but not for Ukrainians, prompting backlash

.

Patriarch Kirill, bishop of the Russian Orthodox Church and long-time Putin ally, has framed Russia’s expansion into Ukraine as a sacred struggle, suggesting that soldiers who die in combat have their sins forgiven.

As with Trump, and figures like Tommy Robinson, Putin’s public identification as a defender of Christian values and his close relationship with the Russian Orthodox Church, has prompted scepticism about the sincerity of his faith.
Christian theologians and clergy worldwide have condemned this rhetoric, with Orthodox clerics accusing Putin and Patriarch Kirill of using “Russian world” ideology as the principal theological justification for a war of aggression.

In 2023, Alexei Gorinov, a Moscow councillor imprisoned for opposing the war, wrote to Kirill asking how the teachings of Jesus could possibly justify the killing of Ukrainians in the name of “Christian values.”

Is there hope?

So does the far right’s capture of a debased Christianity matter in the UK, where religion holds far less sway than in the US? Given America’s superpower status, and the reluctance of global leaders to challenge Trump, it should concern us all.

Yet a counterweight may also come from the US. By continuing papal warnings on climate change, expressing solidarity with the world’s poorest, and renewing calls for peace, Pope Leo, the first American pope, has made clear he is no ally of Trump. In early December, he warned that the US was preparing a military attack on Venezuela. Last weekend, he again stressed the importance of human rights, national sovereignty and justice.

As theology writer Catherine Pepinster, observed this week: “Calling out Donald Trump on the legality and morality of a US military incursion will take courage. The signs so far are encouraging – but the moment has come for Leo’s voice to be louder, stronger and angrier.”

Leo, says Pepinster, “could be their most important ally – without an army.”

The neofascist right has had some success in co-opting patriotism and free speech to its perverted cause: so far at least, Christianity seems more resistant.

Gabrielle Pickard-Whitehead is author of Right-Wing Watch

How Jimmy Swaggart’s rise and fall shaped the landscape of American televangelism

Rev. Jimmy Swaggart preaches at the Los Angeles Memorial Sports Arena on March 29, 1987. AP Photo/Mark Avery

The Conversation

December 09, 2025

Jimmy Swaggart, one of the most popular and enduring of the 1980s televangelists, died on July 1, 2025, but his legacy lives.


Along with Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, he drew an audience in the millions, amassed a personal fortune and introduced a new generation of Americans to a potent mix of religion and politics.

Swaggart was an old-time evangelist whose focus was “saving souls.” But he also preached on conservative social issues, warning followers about the evils of abortion, homosexuality and godless communism.

Swaggart also denounced what he called “false cults,” including Catholicism, Judaism and Mormonism. In fact, his denunciations of other religions, as well as his attacks on rival preachers, made him a more polarizing figure than his politicized brethren.

As a reporter, I covered Swaggart in the 1980s. Now, as a scholar of American religion, I argue that while Swaggart did not build institutions like Falwell’s Moral Majority or Robertson’s 700 Club, he helped to spread right-wing positions on social issues, such as sexual orientation and abortion, and to shape the image of televangelists in popular culture.

Swaggart’s cousins

Born into a hardscrabble life in a small Louisiana town, Swaggart grew up alongside his cousins Jerry Lee Lewis, the future rockabilly pioneer, and future country singer Mickey Gilley.

All three loved music and singing. They polished their playing on an uncle’s piano and sneaked into African American nightclubs to hear the jazz and blues forbidden by their parents.

While Gilley and Lewis turned their musical talent into recording and performing careers, Swaggart felt called to the ministry. He dropped out of high school, married at 17, began preaching at 20 and was ordained at 26.

He was licensed by the Assemblies of God, a Pentecostal denomination that believes the Holy Spirit endows believers with spiritual gifts that include speaking in tongues and faith healing.

The glory years

Pentecostals were nicknamed Holy Rollers because of their tendency to shake, quake and roll on the floor when feeling the Holy Spirit. Their preachers excelled at rousing audiences’ ardor, and Swaggart commanded the stage better than most. He paced, pounced and poured forth sweat while begging listeners to turn from sin and accept Jesus.

Starting small, he drew crowds while preaching on a flatbed trailer throughout the South. His following grew, and in 1969 he opened the Family Worship Center in Baton Rouge.

At capacity, the church held 10,000 worshippers, who represented a broad swath of America: young girls and grannies, white and Black, bankers and farmers. His sermons began calmly but built to a fever pitch. CBS newsman Dan Rather once called him the “country’s greatest speaker.”

During services, Swaggart also sang and played piano. In 1982, Newsweek magazine noted his musical chops, naming him the “King of Honky Tonk Heaven.” His music crossed gospel, country and honky-tonk – songs with a strong rhythmic beat – and he sold 17 million albums over his lifetime.

By 1975, Swaggart’s on-stage charisma powered the launch of a television ministry that would reach millions within a decade. Viewers were captivated by his soulful tunes and fire-and-brimstone sermons. At its height, Swaggart’s show was televised in 140 countries, including Peru, the Philippines and South Africa.

His ministry also became the largest mail-order business in Louisiana, selling books, tapes, T-shirts and biblical memorabilia. Thanks to the US$150 million raised annually from donations and sales, Swaggart lived in an opulent mansion, possessed a private jet previously owned by the Rockefellers, sported a yellow gold vintage Rolex and drove a Jaguar.

The downfall

Swaggart disliked competition and had a history of humiliating rival preachers. Wary of the Rev. Marvin Gorman, a Pentecostal minister whose church also was in Louisiana, Swaggart accused the man of adultery. Gorman admitted his infidelity and was defrocked.

Gorman had heard rumors about Swaggart’s own indiscretions, and he and his son decided to tail the famed evangelist. In 1988, they caught Swaggart at a motel with a prostitute, and Gorman reported the incident to Swaggart’s denomination. He also gave news outlets photos of Swaggart and the prostitute. In a tearful, televised apology, Swaggart pleaded for a second chance.

While his fans were willing, the Assemblies of God had conditions: Swaggart received the standard two-year suspension for sexual immorality. Defying the ruling, Swaggart went back to work after three months, and the denomination defrocked him.

Swaggart might have succeeded as an independent minister, but in 1991 the police stopped his car for driving on the wrong side of the road. Inside they found the preacher with a prostitute. This time, Swaggart did not ask for forgiveness. Instead, he informed his congregation, “The Lord told me it’s flat none of your business.”

Afterward, Swaggart never regained his former standing. His mail-order business dried up, donations fell, and attendance at services cratered. But up until his death, he kept on, in his own words, as an “old-fashioned, Holy Ghost-filled, shouting, weeping, soul-winning, Gospel-preaching preacher.”

Swaggart’s legacy

Swaggart, like other 1980s televangelists, brought right-wing politics into American homes. But unlike Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, Swaggart was less interested in winning elections than saving souls. In fact, when Robertson considered a presidential run in 1988, Swaggart initially tried to dissuade him – then changed his mind and supported him.

Swaggart’s calls for a return to conservative Christian norms live on – not just in Sunday sermons but also in today’s world of tradwives, abortion restrictions and calls to repeal gay marriage. His music lives on, too. The day before he died, the Southern Gospel Music Association Hall of Fame inducted him as a member.

But his legacy also survives in popular culture. In recent years, both reality television and scripted series have starred preachers shaped in the image of Swaggart and his peers. Most exaggerate his worst characteristics for shock and comedic effect.

“Preachers of L.A.,” a 2013 reality show that profiled six Los Angeles pastors, featured blinged-out ministers whose sermons mixed hip-hop with the Bible. The fictional “Greenleaf” followed the scandals of an extended family’s Memphis megachurch, while “The Righteous Gemstones,” a dark spoof of Southern preachers, turned a family ministry into a site for sex, murder and moneymaking.

But these imitations can’t match the reality. Swaggart was a larger-than-life minister whose story – from small-town wannabe to disgraced pastor, to preaching to those who would listen – had it all: sex, politics, music and religion.

For those who want a taste of the real thing, The King of Honky Tonk Heaven lives on. You can see his old services and Bible studies streaming daily on his network.

Diane Winston, Professor and Knight Center Chair in Media & Religion, USC Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

I met Chávez and Maduro. I know drugs are not the reason Trump wants war with Venezuela

Oil and diamonds. How much blood are they worth?

Greg Palast
October 25, 2025 
RAW STORY


Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez shows Greg Palast Simon Bolivar’s sword. Picture: Palast Investigative Fund 2002.


I met with Venezuela’s President Hugo Chávez just days after he was kidnapped. I’ll tell you about that, and the current President Nicolás Maduro’s visit to my New York office. But first you must know three things about Venezuela, to understand why Donald Trump has ordered a covert operation to overthrow their government.

1.Venezuela has the largest reserves of oil on the planet.
2.Venezuela has the largest reserves of oil on the planet.
3.Venezuela has the largest reserves of oil on the planet.

Look it up: According to OPEC’s own site, Venezuela’s 303 billion barrels in proven reserves are four times the reserves of Saudi Arabia.


(By the way, Donald, when you announce a “covert” operation, it’s no longer covert. But never mind.)


For years, I was BBC Television’s correspondent covering Venezuela and US attempts to overthrow their elected government. Trump invented nothing. This is at least the fourth US-backed attempt at overthrow and assassination of a Venezuelan president.

The first attempt was in March 2002 when I was tipped off that Chávez would be overthrown in a military coup. Indeed, in April of that year, he was kidnapped by renegade officers who had the fantasy, shared by the US State Department, that the public hated Chavez and would celebrate his overthrow.

But it turned into another Bay of Pigs after tens of thousands of angry Venezuelans surrounded Miraflores Palace while the coup leaders “inaugurated” Exxon Oil’s lawyer as “president.” George W. Bush’s Ambassador to Venezuela attended this wacky inauguration of the faux president.

But then the plotters, with Exxon’s man and the US ambassador, fled the Presidential Palace after the coup leaders, fearing for their lives, returned Chávez, by helicopter, safely to his Oval Office.

(Download the film of my BBC reports, The Assassination of Hugo Chávez, produced with Oscar-nominated cinematographer Richard Rowley. If you’d like to make a tax-deductible donation, we would truly appreciate it.)

I met days later with Chávez, who told my BBC audience that while he was in the helicopter, he clutched his rosary because he expected to be pushed out into the sea.

Instead, he was returned safely by the frightened coup leaders back to his office. Chávez then chose to let his kidnappers escape without punishment.

In 2004, Maduro, the future president, was sent by Chávez to meet with me at my office in New York to review the evidence that Wackenhut Corporation (now called GEO, a major operator of ICE detention centers) had planned to assassinate Chávez.

Venezuelan intelligence had secretly taped US Embassy contractors in Caracas talking in spook-speak: “That which took shape here is a disguised kind of intelligence… which is annexed to the third security ring, which is the invisible ring.” (“Invisible Ring”? Someone at the State Department has read too many John le Carré novels.)

The State Department under George W. Bush also tried to purge voters from Venezuela’s election files (and those in Argentina and Mexico) using the very same company, Choicepoint, that purged voter files in Florida in 2000 to hand Bush his baloney election “victory.”

Third try: During Trump I, the US attempted to bully Venezuelans into electing a white guy named Juan Guaidó (who lived in the US) whom Trump hoped would defeat Maduro in an election. But the Black and Indian population of Venezuela, after they finally elected one of their own, Chávez, were not going back to white minority rule which had crushed them for 400 years. Guaidó never even ran for president, but the US government nevertheless declared him the true president and gave this grifter all the US assets of CITGO, the Venezuelan oil company

Today, we are at the fourth attempt to overthrow Venezuela’s government by kidnap (again?!) or assassination.

This time is different, because President Maduro really did lose his third re-election bid for the presidency but has simply refused to leave office. (Hey, you’d think Trump would admire that.)

No question, Maduro has become a dictator. But if the US thinks it can invade Venezuela, or appoint Maduro’s replacement, you don’t know Venezuelans. They are patriots and they are all armed. How many Americans will Trump send to their deaths to get his hands on Venezuelan crude?

Democracy

The saddest thing is that Maduro has corrupted and destroyed the robust democracy that Chávez brought to Venezuela. In 2006, I joined Chávez’s opponent Julio Borges, a decent guy, on the campaign trail. Borges would get just two or three supporters in a town. Then I joined Chávez who, in the same town, would appear and draw thousands.

Chávez was wildly popular because, as an opposition journalist told me, derisively, “Chavez gives them bread and bricks!” — that is, he gave the public food, housing and medical care by using the nation’s massive oil proceeds for public services. Under the old regime, the oil wealth was siphoned into the pockets of wealthy Venezuelans in Miami.


I have little sympathy for Maduro, who like Trump has taken office through vote manipulation. But the invasion or assassination of either head of state should scare and horrify us all.

Why not Saudi Arabia?

Trump and our National Security Advisor, Marco Rubio, have said that Maduro must go because he has threatened democracy in Venezuela and is trafficking fentanyl into the US.

Think about it. If Trump wants to save democracy, why attack Venezuela, not the dictatorships of Saudi Arabia or Abu Dhabi or the Emirates? Let’s not forget that Arabian Peninsula “royals” are merely dictators in bathrobes.


Why Venezuela and not the Arabian Peninsula potentates?

Let me count the ways: Qatar has bought $2 billion of Trump crypto coins that will go into Trump family pockets. And there’s that little gift from Qatar of a 747 jet for The Donald, not the US government. And there’s the $2 billion in easy squeezy from the Saudis for Jared Kushner.

A 'narco terrorist'?


Trump has accused Maduro of running a cartel dumping fentanyl into the US, an accusation as credible as Trump’s claim against that other alleged narco-terrorist nation, Canada.

I am no fan of my once-friend Maduro, now a brutal authoritarian and vote thief, a Venezuelan Putin. But drug lord? No sane drug dealer would run drugs from Caracas to Miami. In fact, according to the latest UN World Drug Report, Venezuela is neither a major drug producer nor a key trafficking corridor to the US.

Trump’s troops have slaughtered more than two dozen people who were supposedly running drugs from Caracas to Miami. While Trinidad’s president is a Trump ally, that government stated that the two dead who could be identified, Chad Joseph and Rishi Samaroo, were simply commuting from work, like many workers, across the seven-mile strait between the countries. Even our Secretary of State, “Little Marco,” said the boat was merely heading to Trinidad then changed his statement to “Miami” after Trump announced their supposed destination.

And did you notice? Every time a US prosecutor interdicts a drug shipment, they proudly display the drugs and cash and the names of the dealers obtained in the haul. Yet after these little commuter boats were attacked, not sunk, we were never shown the drugs, the evidence.

There was indeed a drug boat, a submersible, attacked by the US. But American media generally failed to mention that, unlike the fishermen and commuters killed coming from Venezuela, the one real drug haul came from Colombia and was captured in the Pacific Ocean, not the Caribbean.

So where are the drugs coming from, if not Venezuela or Canada? According to a New Yorker investigation, one of the world’s largest and most violent cocaine cartels, the Kinahan Organized Crime Group, is run out of — you guessed it — Abu Dhabi.

Act of war

There’s no doubt why most Venezuelans want to see Maduro go. The economy is on its deathbed. Why? Because a US blockade, basically a siege of Venezuela, has caused the near total collapse of Venezuela’s source of wealth, its oil industry. By blocking oil equipment from going in, and an embargo of oil going out, the nation is being strangled. An embargo is a globally recognized act of war which Americans (let alone Venezuelans) never authorized.



Greg Palast meets Nicolás Maduro. Picture: Palast Investigative Fund 2004.


The idea that Maduro wrecked the economy is b------t through and through. Imagine if America laid siege to Texas, allowing no goods in, blocking oil from going out.

Nevertheless, the public, hoping the embargo would lift, voted out Maduro. He must go. But by Venezuelan ballots, not American bullets.

And let me tell you as an energy economist that the embargo of Venezuelan oil, cutting the nation’s exports 74 percent from 2.4 million barrels a day to 735,000, has easily added nearly a dollar to the price paid by Americans at the gas pump.

Chávez told me that he knew the limit of how far he could push the US and its oil companies. “I’m a good chess player,” he told me. Not Maduro. For example, Maduro turned down British Petroleum’s request to take over the oil fields once operated by the French national oil company. Britain later seized $10 billion in Venezuela’s gold reserves held in the British Exchequer.

As you’ll see at the opening of my film The Assassination of Hugo Chávez, the whacko idea of murdering Venezuela’s president was first floated on television by none other than televangelist Pat Robertson, whom inside sources told me was furious that he was turned down in his request to the Chávez government for a diamond mining concession.

To his TV audience, Robertson said, “You know, I don't know about this doctrine of assassination, but if [Chávez] thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it. It's a whole lot cheaper than starting a war.”

That’s true, I suppose. But why start a war at all?

Oil and diamonds. How much blood are they worth?

May I suggest that we return democracy to Venezuela with ballots, not bullets.Greg Palast is an investigative journalist and filmmaker, author of New York Times bestsellers including The Best Democracy Money Can Buy. Sign up for his reports at https://gregpalast.substack.com/

The Very Real Possibility That Trump Could Try To Destroy Women’s Voting Rights

Nathalie Baptiste
Fri, August 15, 2025 
This article is part of HuffPost’s biweekly politics newsletter

“In my ideal society, we would vote as households,” Doug Wilson, an extreme right-wing pastor said in a video clip posted to X, formerly known as Twitter. “And I would ordinarily be the one that would cast the vote, but I would cast the vote having discussed it with my household.”

It was part of last Thursday’s CNN segment on Wilson, who believes in Christian reconstruction, an extreme version of Christianity that does not support the right of women to vote. But if that wasn’t disturbing enough on its own, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth reposted the video last week, simply commenting “All of Christ for All of Life.” When Slate magazine reached out to the Pentagon earlier this week seeking clarification on whether or not Hegseth believed women should vote, an agency spokesperson responded with a statement that notably did not say Hegseth believed in women’s right to vote.

When asked for comment, the Pentagon pointed HuffPost to a transcript of a Thursday press briefing in which a spokesperson responds to a reporter by saying, “On your second question about the 19th Amendment, of course the secretary thinks that women should have the right to vote,” said Kingsley Wilson, the Department of Defense press secretary. “That’s a stupid question.”

She does not explain why Hegseth reposted the video.

Julie Ingersoll, a University of North Florida religious studies professor who focuses on Christian reconstructionism, warnsthe belief isn’t as fringe as you might think.

“They are explicit about the fact that women should submit. The model for women shouldn’t have a vote is already there,” she told HuffPost.

Take a quick glance at comments about the video Hegseth reshared: “You see a lot of people [on social media] saying, ‘I see nothing wrong with this,’” Ingersoll said. “It’s a shocking number of people.”

Opposition to women voting is hardly new — after the 19th Amendment granted women voting rights in 1920, there were plenty of detractors — but in Trump’s second term, the proponents of these beliefs are certainly sensing an opportunity to do some real damage.

A few years ago, the idea that women shouldn’t have the vote would be seen as an absurd stance, close to conspiracy theory. But in recent years, as far-right stances become more mainstream and so called “traditional” gender roles reemerge as a cultural talking point, it feels much more dangerous. When a member of the president’s cabinet has to be asked about whether he stands behind the 19th Amendment, what does that mean for where the political winds are blowing?

Experts don’t believe that women’s right to vote is in imminent danger, but brushing it off as right-wing nonsense isn’t necessarily the right way to approach this movement either.

“The characterization of [Wilson] as ‘extremism’ can be problematic,” Ingersoll said. “You think you don’t have to pay attention to it, but they’ve been building on this for years.”

There is a long relationship between evangelical Christians and the GOP, like when controversial pastors like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson were leading the movement to push more Christianity into public life. But Ingersoll says the second Trump term is in new terrain. “The religious right has always been in the room, but not in the way the Christian nationalists are today.”

Related: Newsom's Press Office Slams 'DISGUSTING' Use Of U.S. Soldiers To Roll Out Red Carpet For Putin

Opponents of women’s rights have been emboldened by Trump, who has been willing to implement a Christian nationalist agenda in exchange for votes. (He also has a bad track record when it comes to respecting women.)

“Trump can be president as long as he’s doing God’s will,” Ingersoll summed up the thinking.

Though Trump denied being involved with it on the campaign trail, he has been using Project 2025, the ultraconservative policy guide, as a playbook for his second term. One of the architects of it, Russell Vought, is nowthe head of the Office of Personnel Management, the powerful agency which oversees the federal government’s civil servant workforce.

Related: Trump Floats Alternative After Failing To Secure Russia-Ukraine Ceasefire Deal: ‘Lives Will Be Saved’

“Project 2025 was written by Christian nationalists,” Ingersoll said. “And that’s who the administration has hired.” The administration has implemented policies that allow federal workers to proselytize at work, launched anti-Christian bias task forces based on false claims of discrimination, and allowed tax-exempt churches to engage in political activity, a significant weakening of the separation of church and state.

It’d probably be difficult for the Trump administration to lead an effort to repeal a constitutional amendment, which is what would be required to strip women’s right to vote on paper. But that doesn’t mean they can’t deal a serious blow to women’s rights.

“They’ll stop women from voting the same way they stopped Black people from voting,” Ingersoll said.

The conservative right has spent decades rolling back the Voting Rights Act, the landmark civil rights legislation which protected Black people’s right to vote. But the strategy has never been to outright overturn it, which would likely cause public outcry and hard-to-deny accusations of racism. Nor has the right directly attacked the universal male suffrage encoded in the 14th Amendment, which would be even harder for the same reasons. Instead, the plan has been simply to chip away at the ability to access those rights.

There are myriad laws throughout the country that make it harder for marginalized people to vote, many of which disproportionately affect Black voters. Voter ID laws that require drivers licenses, birth certificates or passports in order to cast a ballot put onerous restrictions on citizens without those documents, which often cost money and time to obtain. Government officials have altered the times and locations of where people can vote, like by eliminating early voting days, closing down polling locations or reducing access to mail-in ballots. These restrictions can make it difficult for people who don’t work traditional hours or who live in rural areas to cast a ballot.

They also put women at risk: Women are more likely to have low-paying or multiple jobs without those traditional hours or be busy with being the primary caregiver of their children and other relatives.

“Different policies to make it harder for people to vote will impact women of all different backgrounds,” Kelly Marino, an associate professor of history at Sacred Heart University who specializes in women’s suffrage and other gender issues, told HuffPost.

Indeed, we are already seeing it — in April, the House passed the SAVE Act, legislation that would effectively strip married women of their voting rights. The bill would have required registering to vote using the name on one’s birth certificate or passport, which often does not match married women’s IDs, since many women take their spouse’s last name. According to Politico, an estimated 69 million women have a birth certificate that doesn’t match their legal name. If it becomes law, millions of people will have had to either pay to get their birth certificates altered or pay to get a new passport. It has so far not been taken up in the Senate.

And the strategy of chipping away at rather than eliminating rights has already been used against women, albeit in another arena. For years, conservatives pursued an anti-abortion strategy of constructing roadblock after roadblock to accessing reproductive care, even as pregnant people still had the right to abortion on paper.

Related: Tim Walz's Response To Trump's Depressing Smithsonian Audit Plans Is Going Viral

When the movement culminated in the overturn of national abortion rights in 2022’s Supreme Court case Dobbs v. Jackson, the conservative majority framed the decision not as the eliminating a constitutional right,but as granting permission for states to regulate — including by banning — what had once been a national right.“[T]he people of the various States may evaluate those interests differently,” Justice Samuel Alito wrote in the majority opinion.

In a concurrence, Justice Brett Kavanaugh glibly added, “may a State bar a resident of that State from traveling to another State to obtain an abortion? In my view, the answer is no based on the constitutional right to interstate travel.”

But besides a cultural and religious objection to women’s independence, there is a very real political factor as well behind the push to deny women the ballot: When women gained the right to vote, it changed the political landscape.

In the last few decades, the number of female voters has steadily increased. In every presidential election since 1984, women have turned out in higher numbers than men. There is also a large gender gap between the two parties, with women tilting heavily for Democrats compared to men.

The gap is even wider for young women, who have become increasingly liberal. A Gallup poll analysis found that between 2017 and 2024, an average of 40% of women aged 18-29 identified as liberal, a 12-point increase from the years 2001 to 2007. This increase has also coincided with a record number of women elected to public office.

Related: Donald Trump Is Trying To Soften His Image With Women Voters. It’s Going To Be Tough.

Barring any drastic changes, the number of women identifying as liberal or Democratic is likely to continue to increase. Which is perhaps why conservatives suggest big changes: In 2016, after a FiveThirtyEight poll suggested that Democrat Hillary Clinton would easily win the presidential election if only women voted, and Trump if only men voted, the hashtag #repealthe19th went viral on social media.

Eight years on, the political landscape is very different. But experts think that women voters will continue to push back on GOP policies — and officials.

“I don’t think we’re doomed, these policies are hitting people on a day-to-day level,” Marino said. “I don’t think it’s a death sentence for women’s rights. People are going to wake up.”

Anti-Shariah conspiracy theories, a staple of 9/11-era rhetoric, resurge around NY Mayor candidate Mamdani

(RNS) — As critics revive anti-Shariah talk, Muslim advocates fear consequences for communities across the country.

Social media posts about New York City Democratic mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani, center. 

(AP Photo/Yuki Iwamura; RNS illustration)

Fiona André
August 6, 2025
RNS

(RNS) — Since Zohran Mamdani’s victory in the New York City Democratic mayoral primary in June, conspiracy theories involving his Muslim faith have ranged from highly questionable to bizarre.

One theory was that he plans to introduce radical Islam to the city. A stranger one was that he was culpable in the shooting deaths of four people in a Park Avenue office building on July 28. Neither theory has been supported by evidence.

“The cop killer in NYC who just killed an NYPD officer was a Mamdani supporter,” Laura Loomer, the far-right commentator and adviser to President Donald Trump, posted on X. “@ZohranKMamdani is inspiring a generation of pro-Islamic cop killers. This is why you don’t elect Muslim immigrants to office.”

Charlie Kirk, CEO of Turning Point USA, a conservative Christian organization, said Mamdani’s victory signaled a takeover of Western values by Muslims.

“It’s not Islamophobia to notice that Muslims want to import values into the West that seek to destabalize our civilization. It’s cultural suicide to stay silent,” Kirk wrote in a June 25 X post.

The same day, U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., posted on X a picture of the Statue of Liberty covered in a black burqa. Her colleague Rep. Andy Ogles, a Republican from Tennessee, called Mamdani “Zohran ‘little muhammad’ Mamdani” in an X post questioning his path to citizenship and calling for his deportation.

A Charlie Kirk post on X about Minneapolis mayoral candidate Omar Fateh. (Screen grab)

Such attacks mirror those aimed at Omar Fateh, a democratic socialist candidate running for mayor in Minneapolis. After the city’s Democratic Farmer-Labor Party convention endorsed Fateh — who, like Mamdani, is Muslim — Kirk said on X that Muslims were “commanded to take over the government in the land they live,” adding, “the attempted Islamic takeover of America is made possible thanks to mass immigration.” Fateh was born in Washington, D.C., and is the son of Somali immigrants.

In North Texas, the East Plano Islamic Center, known as EPIC, a mosque seeking to establish a Muslim-centric community, has faced accusations claiming the group seeks to impose Shariah, or Islamic religious law, in the state.

Unsupported claims attributing a radical religious agenda to prominent Muslims are an attempt to discredit their political ambitions, said author Wajahat Ali, who is Muslim and writes about Islamophobia. Such accusations trace back to post-9/11 Islamophobic tropes, presenting Muslim beliefs as a threat to America, he said.

These kinds of claims are now seeing a resurgence as public Islamophobic statements and incidents have increased after the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attacks on Israel and the ensuing Israel-Hamas war. As anti-Shariah rhetoric gains ground in a more online way than in the past, Muslim advocates fear consequences for their communities across the country. Muslim activist groups are also alarmed by decreased hate speech moderation on platforms such as X, which facilitates the spread of such claims.

“This is a reboot of a fearmongering story that was mainstream in 2010. … Now, they have rebooted it because of Zohran Mamdani, Rashida Tlaib, Ilhan Omar and also the Minnesota state senator, Omar Fateh,” Ali said. “It’s an age-old playbook to do a divide and conquer, to have Americans fear.”

RELATED: Zohran Mamdani is running to be New York mayor. How his Muslim faith stirred the race

Shariah, which translates to “way” or “path” in Arabic, is understood to reflect how God expects Muslims to live their lives, said Asifa Quraishi-Landes, a law professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison who specializes in the comparative study of U.S. constitutional law and Islamic law.

Anti-Shariah campaigns flatten what Shariah represents for Muslims, said Khaled Beydoun, a law professor at Arizona State University, who called it a complex religious concept that can’t be reduced to a set of laws.

“Shariah law, like American constitutional law, is very heterogeneous,” he said. “It’s very complex. It’s very layered. There’s a lot of conflict and competing ideas as to what Shariah law is among Muslims.”

Election cycles have long coincided with a surge of inflammatory anti-Muslim speech, said Saher Selod, director of research at the Institute for Social Policy and Understanding in Dearborn, Michigan, which researches American Muslims.


Saher Selod. (Photo courtesy ISPU)

“Muslims definitely are cognizant of this increased rhetoric that comes along with any election cycle and what it means for their safety,” she said.

The often conservative voices crusading against Shariah typically depict Islam as an ideology that seeks to control all aspects of social life, rather than a religion.

“The stereotype is that Muslims are a threat,” Selod said. “It keeps a population fearful that Muslims are coming, and they’re going to change American law. They’re going to change the way Americans live their life through taking over our laws and policies.”

The discourse is also grounded in assuming Muslims hide their intentions. For example, in an early July post, Loomer warned her followers about Taqiyya, a concept from the medieval Islamic era referring to concealing one’s beliefs to avoid danger. She said it “permits Muslims to lie about everything for the sake of advancing Islam.”

“They mystified Taqiyya as religiously mandated lying — that Muslim Americans are commanded to lie,” Ali said of critics. “So, even the moderate Muslims couldn’t be trusted because their goal is to implement Shariah.”

Legal efforts to ban Shariah gained traction after Park51, an Islamic community center and mosque, was proposed to open in lower Manhattan in 2010. Referred to as the “Ground Zero mosque” by opponents due to its proximity to the Twin Towers terrorist attack, it was the site of many protests led by anti-Muslim activist Pamela Geller. The mosque became a hot-button issue in the 2010 midterm elections, with many candidates pledging to combat alleged Shariah in the U.S.

In 2012, unsupported theories that President Barack Obama was secretly Muslim and born in Kenya took over discussions during his second presidential election, prompting him to present his long-form birth certificate.

According to a 2018 Southern Poverty Law Center report, 201 anti-Shariah bills have been introduced in 43 states since 2010. The texts usually defined Shariah as a “legal-political-military” doctrine.

The anti-Shariah movement gained prominence after 9/11, but such rhetoric dates back to the 1990s.

“When 9/11 came along … (there) was already a baseline of anti-Muslim sentiment in the U.S., and this obviously coalesced everything,” said Lawrence Pintak, a Washington State University professor in the communications department and author of the 2019 book “America & Islam: Soundbites, Suicide Bombs and the Road to Donald Trump.”

The Investigative Project on Terrorism, a nonprofit research group created by Steven Emerson in 1995, researched links between American Muslims and Islamist terrorism. It fueled Islamophobic campaigns through the 2010s, as a network of anti-Muslim organizations began to emerge.



In 2009, IPT members organized a campaign against the opening of the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro in Tennessee. The mosque drew opposition from such figures as Pat Robertson, the Christian Broadcasting Network founder, and Frank Gaffney, founder of the Center for Security Policy, which led anti-Shariah legislation efforts in the 2010s.


RELATED: Murfreesboro mosque fight laid to rest after Supreme Court ruling

In those years, the anti-Shariah movement mostly singled out local mosques.

“The argument was that it was a threat to Christianity — it was a threat to American values,” Pintak said. “After 9/11 and really through the ’10s and right up to Trump’s first election, you had the terrorism narrative. But right now, we don’t really have a terrorism narrative the way we had it before. … It’s back to being ‘They are the other, they are anti-Christian.’”

These organizations aren’t the face of the anti-Shariah movement anymore, Pintak noted. Internet figures such as Loomer now shape mostly online discussions. They tend to focus on Muslim American politicians, who increasingly became visible in left-wing politics after the 2018 midterm elections.

Democrat mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani speaks during a rally at the Hotel & Gaming Trades Council headquarters in New York, July 2, 2025. (AP Photo/Richard Drew)

“It has shifted, and it has diversified,” Pintak said. “Social media dramatically changed the way the narrative is spread.”

On her X account, which boasts 1.7 million followers, Loomer frequently comments on Mamdani’s campaign, claiming seemingly without proof that he would impose his religious beliefs if elected mayor of New York.


“Muslims only use political power to advance the cause of Islam. They are single issue voters: Islam,” she posted July 31.

After Mamdani’s win in New York’s primary election, Loomer called him a “jihadist Muslim with ties to Iran” who wants “sharia and communism in NYC.”

Recent internet attacks against Muslims running for office, claiming they seek to advance an Islamist agenda, have frustrated advocates. Jaylani Hussein, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations’ Minnesota chapter, denounced Islamophobic comments against Fateh as “factually inaccurate, dangerously inflammatory, and reflective of a broader trend of Islamophobic fearmongering nationwide.”

RELATED: Mamdani’s win unleashed a surge of Islamophobia — and showed how to beat it

Fateh, a 35-year-old Minnesota state senator, and Jacob Frey, the incumbent mayor running for reelection, both condemned comments affiliating Fateh with radical Islam.

False social media allegations also have gained momentum as many platforms have backtracked on long-standing content moderation practices. Such conditions help Islamophobic tropes circulate faster, said Haris Tarin, vice president of policy and programming for the Muslim Public Affairs Council. Tarin said he worries platforms could also become a hotbed for antisemitic, white supremacist and Hindutva (Hindu nationalism) hate speech.



Concerns over EPIC City, the proposed Texas Muslim-centric development, gained traction on X, he said.

A February post by Amy Mekelburg, known online as Amy Mek, drew attention to the EPIC project, seemingly resulting in state and federal authorities launching investigations into EPIC. In her post, Mekelburg, founder and editor of RAIR Foundation, a conservative organization focused on immigration and Islam, called EPIC “Texas’s First Sharia City.”

A rendering of the proposed EPIC City community near Josephine, Texas.

 (Image courtesy of Community Capital Partners)

The project, she wrote, “isn’t just a housing development — it’s the expansion of a sharia-controlled society … ” The religious school included in the development would serve as “a pipeline for a parallel Islamic society, enforcing sharia from childhood,” Mek wrote.

Reposts and responses from Texas Gov. Greg Abbott and Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, helped amplify the outrage against the project, Tarin explained.

“It was not a local community issue — it wasn’t people in North Dallas saying ‘We don’t want this mosque, or we don’t want this development,'” Tarin said. ” … It started on X.”

The mosque, which said in promotional materials the community would welcome residents of all faiths, planned to offer 1,000 housing units, senior living, commercial spaces, a faith-based school and a community college. A promotional clip described EPIC City as being “more than just a neighborhood, it’s a way of life. A meticulously designed community that brings Islam to the forefront.”

RELATED: In Texas’ pushback against a Muslim planned community, a retread of old fears

In March, the Texas State Securities Board launched an investigation into EPIC for alleged “failures to comply with applicable state and federal securities requirements, including protections against fraud,” Abbott announced in a statement claiming the mosque misled investors.

“All entities in Texas must follow state law, not sharia law,” he wrote in the statement.

In April, Cornyn demanded that U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi open an investigation into EPIC City, claiming the community would discriminate against non-Muslim residents.

EPIC, wrote Cornyn in a letter to Bondi, “is designed as an exclusive religious settlement where Islamic principles govern not only daily life and education, but commerce.”

The Department of Justice dropped its investigation of EPIC in late June, but Abbott signed a property law designed to challenge its development. During the monthslong controversy, the Muslim Public Affairs Council advised the mosque, helping it obtain legal representation and become aware of the discourse on social media. The mosque was forced to shut down its funeral services amid the backlash, Tarin said.

While anti-Shariah discussion is on the rise, more people of diverse backgrounds seem ready to denounce it, Ali said, pointing at memes mocking such comments after Mamdani’s win in New York’s primary.

“I’ve been covering this for 15 years,” he said. “It used to be always the Muslims who had to call it out.”

Sen. Cotton urges IRS to review CAIR's nonprofit status, alleges ties with terror groups

(RNS) — Cotton’s letter is the latest in a series of accusations claiming CAIR has ties to terror organizations and denouncing the group’s pro-Palestinian activism.

Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., speaks at the Capitol in Washington, Jan. 15, 2025. (AP Photo/John McDonnell, File)

Fiona André and Bob Smietana
August 6, 2025

(RNS) — Republican Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas has urged the IRS to open an investigation into the Council on American-Islamic Relations’ nonprofit status over its alleged “deep ties to terrorist organizations.”

In a letter addressed to IRS Commissioner Billy Long on Monday (Aug. 4), Cotton claimed CAIR worked to “advance the Islamist agenda in America while concealing their true affiliations.”

One of the country’s largest Muslim advocacy groups, CAIR was founded in 1994 and works to empower and support Muslim Americans.

“Recent news and longstanding evidence demonstrate CAIR’s ties to terrorist organizations, including Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood, and their activities,” wrote Cotton in his letter.

Cotton’s letter repeats allegations made about CAIR by conservative critics since the mid-2000s, citing evidence presented during a federal investigation of the Holy Land Foundation, a prominent Muslim charity that was shut down in 2001. At the time, the group had been one of the largest Muslim charities in the country. Leaders of the Holy Land Foundation were accused of diverting funds to Palestinian groups with ties to Hamas. In 2008, five leaders of the group, who claimed they were involved in humanitarian work, were convicted of supporting Hamas.

For years, federal law enforcement had been monitoring officials from Hamas, even before it was classified as a terrorist group in 1997, and had wiretapped meetings between those officials and Palestinian American leaders in the early 1990s. In 1993, the founders of CAIR were part of one of those meetings in Philadelphia, and transcripts from the meetings were later introduced into evidence during the Holy Land Foundation trial. Cotton cites that 1993 meeting as evidence that CAIR has ties to terrorists.

Nihad Awad, executive director and co-founder of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, speaks outside the White House, Aug. 25, 2021, in Washington. (AP Photo/Amanda Andrade-Rhoades)

Cotton’s letter is the latest in a series of accusations claiming CAIR has ties to terror organizations, amid the group’s vocal pro-Palestinian activism. Since the start of the Israel-Hamas war, CAIR has repeatedly called for a ceasefire and denounced the humanitarian situation in Gaza.

Cotton’s letter points to CAIR’s pro-Palestinian activism, citing a November 2023 speech by CAIR’s executive director, Nihad Awad, at the American Muslims for Palestine convention in Chicago.

“I was happy to see people breaking the siege and throwing down the shackles of their own land and walk free into their land, which they were not allowed to walk in,” said Awad, referring to the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attacks on Israel, at the convention.

The White House condemned Awad’s comments, denouncing them as “shocking, antisemitic,” according to a statement of then-White House spokesman Andrew Bates shared with CNN at the time. After the controversy, Awad issued a statement condemning the Oct. 7 attacks.

Cotton’s letter urges the IRS to “immediately investigate CAIR’s compliance with section 501(c)(3), including a review of its financial records, affiliations, and activities.”

“Tax-exempt status is a privilege, not a right, and it should not subsidize organizations with links to terrorism,” reads the document.

CAIR logo. (Image courtesy of CAIR)

An IRS spokesperson told Religion News Service that “federal employees are barred by law from disclosing tax return information, including whether the agency is investigating or examining the return of any taxpayer.”

“Tom Cotton’s baseless demand that the IRS target a nonprofit organization based on debunked conspiracy theories is an un-American political stunt straight from the McCarthy era,” wrote CAIR in an email statement to RNS. “It’s motivated by the senator’s desire to protect the genocidal Israeli government from criticism.”


The group said it condemned both the Hamas attacks on Israel and the “ongoing genocide in Gaza,” adding, “this is called moral consistency. Senator Cotton should try it.”

CAIR has clashed with Cotton in the past. In 2020, the group called on the senator to resign after he made controversial comments about slavery in American history. In 2023, CAIR criticized Cotton after he questioned Adeel Manji, who is Muslim, about antisemitism during a Senate hearing. Manji had been nominated as a federal judge by then-President Joe Biden. His nomination eventually failed. The group also criticized Cotton and other senators for supporting the sale of weapons to Israel.

CAIR has run into issues with its tax exemption in the past. In 2011, the IRS automatically revoked the group’s exemption for failing to file annual Form 990 tax disclosures for several years. CAIR’s leaders at the time stated that a paperwork mix-up led to the loss of tax-exempt status. The exemption was restored in 2012.

RELATED: Muslim group, CAIR, regains tax-exempt status

“We are obviously pleased that all the paperwork issues have been resolved and our tax-exempt status has been restored,” Ibrahim Hooper, communications director for CAIR, told The Tennessean newspaper at the time.

In June, Republican Rep. Randall Fine of Florida introduced a bill urging Secretary of State Marco Rubio to designate CAIR a foreign terrorist organization. In January 2024, Fine sponsored a bill barring local and state agencies in Florida from working with CAIR.

“This takes long-overdue action to confront the terrorist threat posed by CAIR, a Trojan horse for terrorism operating inside our own borders,” Fine said in a recent statement announcing the bill.

In July, Texas Republicans issued a statement calling on the state’s elected officials to cut ties with CAIR. The letter denounces CAIR’s alleged “anti-constitutional agenda, its documented terrorist affiliations, and its efforts to undermine American values, laws, and civic institutions.”

'Shiny Happy People' returns to examine the Christian culture war pioneer Teen Mania

(RNS) — The three-part docuseries explores the birth and sudden demise of Teen Mania, plus the gnarly underbelly of a ministry some former members consider abusive.

Promotional art for “Shiny Happy People: A Teenage Holy War.” (Courtesy of Prime Video)
Kathryn Post
July 24, 2025

(RNS) — In 1999, a man in his 30s, dressed in a red button-down shirt, stood in front of some 73,000 Christian teens and invited them into battle. “Do we have any fighting men and women in here ready for a fight for some souls?” Ron Luce, founder of Teen Mania, demanded of the crowd crammed into Michigan’s Pontiac Silverdome, to roars.

At that moment, Teen Mania was perhaps the most consequential Christian teen ministry in the world. Millions of earnest evangelical Christian youths had shown themselves ready over the previous 13 years to inscribe their hearts and not a few checks to change the world. Luce enticed them with a combative “us vs. them” approach to mainstream American culture. In the Silverdome, those militaristic undertones were made explicit, supercharging the youth movement for a new century.

What that century brought, in the now familiar story of many a supercharged ministry, were accusations of abuse from former members and outlandish fear tactics employed to mold the ministry’s teen interns, a gnarly underbelly that is the subject of the second season of Prime Video’s “Shiny Happy People: A Teenage Holy War.” The three-part docuseries, following the success of “Shiny Happy” season one’s 2023 examination of the prolifically pro-natalist Duggar family, rides the fascination with Christian subculture in exploring Teen Mania’s birth and seemingly inevitable demise.

What makes the Teen Mania story more than a rehash of evangelical overreach is watching how, as revealed at “Day One” at the Silverdome, Luce stoked the flames of the culture war still playing out on a national stage today.

When Luce and his wife, Katie, founded Teen Mania in 1986, it was envisioned as an international missionary movement. Global Expeditions, its first major initiative, would transport a group of teens and their leaders abroad for a few weeks, where they would win as many souls for Jesus as possible.

The group’s primary tactic involved Jesus skits, a youth group staple. Often accompanied by music, but no words, the teen missionaries typically acted out variations on the dangers of the temptations of youth — lust, greed, drugs, etc. — that most often end with a confrontation between Jesus and Satan, with Jesus emerging the victor.

But in the 1990s, the organization’s own events back home became emotive, high-energy spectacles in churches and arenas. Called Acquire the Fire, the events employed pyrotechnics, evocative music, intense lighting and stirring altar calls to convey the gospel message.

Carrie Saum in “Shiny Happy People: A Teenage Holy War.” (Courtesy of Prime Video)

“They weren’t appealing to our intellect. They weren’t appealing to our common sense. Looking back at it now, they weren’t even really appealing to our spirits,” Carrie Saum, a Teen Mania alumna featured in the docuseries, told Religion News Service. “They were appealing to our emotions. And that was a really powerful drug.”

April Ajoy, an influencer and author of “Star-Spangled Jesus: Leaving Christian Nationalism and Finding A True Faith,” remembers attending Acquire the Fire events as a kid. Luce’s rhetoric, which she describes as very “black and white,” had a lasting impact.

“You leave so fired up, and you have this deep sense of purpose that there’s no higher calling than for you to give up your entire life to spread the gospel, to save souls,” Ajoy said in an interview. “Because you literally believe that if people do not have your beliefs, that they do not believe in Jesus the way you do, that they will die and go to hell.”

Liz Boltz Ranfeld, the daughter of former Christian musician Ray Boltz who appears in “Shiny Happy People” with her brother Phil, said, “There was the pressure of, I have to get this right, because I have to get these people saved.” But she and her brother don’t discount the intense messaging as a motivator for their evangelism.

Siblings Liz Boltz Ranfeld and Phil Boltz in “Shiny Happy People: A Teenage Holy War.” (Courtesy of Prime Video)

Acquire the Fire events were also used to enlist interns enrolled in the Honor Academy, an intense, on-site gap-year program that included everything from janitorial work and groundskeeping to promoting Teen Mania events. Rather than being paid for these duties, the interns were charged hundreds of dollars a month for the experience, which included early wake-ups, mandatory physical training and adherence to strict rules. No dating or secular music was allowed. Violations, former interns recall, could result in immediate ejection from the program.

Some of the most troubling elements of the program, such as ESOAL — Emotionally Stretching Opportunity of a Lifetime — were designed to push teens to their limits. A boot camp-like experience involved sleep deprivation, mud crawls, wearing military-style fatigues and, some recall for the camera, rolling down vomit-strewn hills.

According to its alums who talked to “Shiny, Happy People,” the manipulation and unpaid labor directly contributed to Honor Academy’s booming success.

In 2005, Teen Mania doubled down, launching the Battle Cry Campaign. Backed by conservative Christian icons such as Chuck Colson, Pat Robertson and Joyce Meyer, it put Luce on a national tour where he deployed war metaphors to urge Christian kids to stand against pornography, gay marriage and materialism.

“It was always, we have a fight. There’s a fight for your young people’s souls, and we’re casting out the devil,” Saum said.

About that time Teen Mania joined the Arlington Group, a coalition of Christian right conservative groups that included the American Family Association, Center for Moral Clarity, Family Research Council and Focus on the Family. By 2014, it had been endorsed by evangelist Billy Graham, former President George W. Bush and Bishop T.D. Jakes, among other influential leaders.

But a year later, Teen Mania Ministries abruptly announced it would shut down. An RNS report from the time cites financial trouble, but also the stories of mistreatment and spiritual abuse being told by watchdog groups and on alumni blogs. As the criticism became public, the Honor Academy struggled to recruit interns. Soon, Teen Mania’s headquarters in Garden Valley, Texas, was in foreclosure.

April Ajoy in “Shiny Happy People: A Teenage Holy War.” (Courtesy of Prime Video)

But the end of Teen Mania didn’t mean the end of its influence, according to the documentary. “The army Ron trained is still out there,” Mica Ringo, creator of the “Recovering Alumni” blog for former Teen Mania interns, tells the filmmakers. Ajoy told RNS that she hears echoes of Teen Mania in the rhetoric of today’s Christian nationalists, who, she said, try to convince Americans, “If you can keep people from sinning through policy and laws, then they have a better chance of going to heaven.”

Ajoy said the importance of “Shiny Happy People: A Teenage Holy War” highlights how extreme, warlike, pro-Christian rhetoric has entered mainstream American discourse, particularly in the evangelical world

“Most people who espouse Christian nationalism in some way don’t think that they are Christian nationalists,” Ajoy told RNS. “They think they’re just being good Christians. They love God. They love people. They vote Republican, because that’s part of it too. But they genuinely believe … that turning America Christian is a call from God.”

Jimmy Swaggart’s rise and fall shaped the landscape of American televangelism

GOING TO HELL IN A HANDBASKET

Jimmy Swaggart’s rise and fall shaped the landscape of American televangelism

(The Conversation) — Swaggart’s calls for a return to conservative Christian norms live on in today’s world of tradwives, limited access to abortion and calls to repeal gay marriage, writes a scholar of religion.

Rev. Jimmy Swaggart preaches at the Los Angeles Memorial Sports Arena on March 29, 1987. (AP Photo/Mark Avery, file)

Diane Winston

July 14, 2025

(The Conversation) — Jimmy Swaggart, one of the most popular and enduring of the 1980s televangelists, died on July 1, 2025, but his legacy lives.

Along with Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, he drew an audience in the millions, amassed a personal fortune and introduced a new generation of Americans to a potent mix of religion and politics.

Swaggart was an old-time evangelist whose focus was “saving souls.” But he also preached on conservative social issues, warning followers about the evils of abortion, homosexuality and godless communism.

Swaggart also denounced what he called “false cults,” including Catholicism, Judaism and Mormonism. In fact, his denunciations of other religions, as well as his attacks on rival preachers, made him a more polarizing figure than his politicized brethren.

As a reporter, I covered Swaggart in the 1980s. Now, as a scholar of American religion, I argue that while Swaggart did not build institutions like Falwell’s Moral Majority or Robertson’s 700 Club, he helped to spread right-wing positions on social issues, such as sexual orientation and abortion, and to shape the image of televangelists in popular culture.

Swaggart’s cousins

Born into a hardscrabble life in a small Louisiana town, Swaggart grew up alongside his cousins Jerry Lee Lewis, the future rockabilly pioneer, and future country singer Mickey Gilley.

All three loved music and singing. They polished their playing on an uncle’s piano and sneaked into African American nightclubs to hear the jazz and blues forbidden by their parents.

Jimmy Swaggart delivering a sermon at the Flora Blanca Stadium in El Salvador.
Cindy Karp/Getty Images

While Gilley and Lewis turned their musical talent into recording and performing careers, Swaggart felt called to the ministry. He dropped out of high school, married at 17, began preaching at 20 and was ordained at 26.

He was licensed by the Assemblies of God, a Pentecostal denomination that believes the Holy Spirit endows believers with spiritual gifts that include speaking in tongues and faith healing.

The glory years

Pentecostals were nicknamed Holy Rollers because of their tendency to shake, quake and roll on the floor when feeling the Holy Spirit. Their preachers excelled at rousing audiences’ ardor, and Swaggart commanded the stage better than most. He paced, pounced and poured forth sweat while begging listeners to turn from sin and accept Jesus.

Starting small, he drew crowds while preaching on a flatbed trailer throughout the South. His following grew, and in 1969 he opened the Family Worship Center in Baton Rouge.

Evangelist Jimmy Swaggart leaves his office complex in Baton Rouge, La., on Jan. 7, 1977.
AP Photo

At capacity, the church held 10,000 worshippers, who represented a broad swath of America: young girls and grannies, white and Black, bankers and farmers. His sermons began calmly but built to a fever pitch. CBS newsman Dan Rather once called him the “country’s greatest speaker.”

During services, Swaggart also sang and played piano. In 1982, Newsweek magazine noted his musical chops, naming him the “King of Honky Tonk Heaven.” His music crossed gospel, country and honky-tonk – songs with a strong rhythmic beat – and he sold 17 million albums over his lifetime.

By 1975, Swaggart’s on-stage charisma powered the launch of a television ministry that would reach millions within a decade. Viewers were captivated by his soulful tunes and fire-and-brimstone sermons. At its height, Swaggart’s show was televised in 140 countries, including Peru, the Philippines and South Africa.

His ministry also became the largest mail-order business in Louisiana, selling books, tapes, T-shirts and biblical memorabilia. Thanks to the US$150 million raised annually from donations and sales, Swaggart lived in an opulent mansion, possessed a private jet previously owned by the Rockefellers, sported a yellow gold vintage Rolex and drove a Jaguar.

The downfall

Swaggart disliked competition and had a history of humiliating rival preachers. Wary of the Rev. Marvin Gorman, a Pentecostal minister whose church also was in Louisiana, Swaggart accused the man of adultery. Gorman admitted his infidelity and was defrocked.

Gorman had heard rumors about Swaggart’s own indiscretions, and he and his son decided to tail the famed evangelist. In 1988, they caught Swaggart at a motel with a prostitute, and Gorman reported the incident to Swaggart’s denomination. He also gave news outlets photos of Swaggart and the prostitute. In a tearful, televised apology, Swaggart pleaded for a second chance.

While his fans were willing, the Assemblies of God had conditions: Swaggart received the standard two-year suspension for sexual immorality. Defying the ruling, Swaggart went back to work after three months, and the denomination defrocked him.

A parishioner overcome with grief lies on steps to the altar after Jimmy Swaggart’s confession of sexual indiscretions.
Thomas S. England/Getty Images

Swaggart might have succeeded as an independent minister, but in 1991 the police stopped his car for driving on the wrong side of the road. Inside they found the preacher with a prostitute. This time, Swaggart did not ask for forgiveness. Instead, he informed his congregation, “The Lord told me it’s flat none of your business.”

Afterward, Swaggart never regained his former standing. His mail-order business dried up, donations fell, and attendance at services cratered. But up until his death, he kept on, in his own words, as an “old-fashioned, Holy Ghost-filled, shouting, weeping, soul-winning, Gospel-preaching preacher.”

Swaggart’s legacy

Swaggart, like other 1980s televangelists, brought right-wing politics into American homes. But unlike Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, Swaggart was less interested in winning elections than saving souls. In fact, when Robertson considered a presidential run in 1988, Swaggart initially tried to dissuade him – then changed his mind and supported him.

Swaggart’s calls for a return to conservative Christian norms live on – not just in Sunday sermons but also in today’s world of tradwives, abortion restrictions and calls to repeal gay marriage. His music lives on, too. The day before he died, the Southern Gospel Music Association Hall of Fame inducted him as a member.

But his legacy also survives in popular culture. In recent years, both reality television and scripted series have starred preachers shaped in the image of Swaggart and his peers. Most exaggerate his worst characteristics for shock and comedic effect.

“Preachers of L.A.,” a 2013 reality show that profiled six Los Angeles pastors, featured blinged-out ministers whose sermons mixed hip-hop with the Bible. The fictional “Greenleaf” followed the scandals of an extended family’s Memphis megachurch, while “The Righteous Gemstones,” a dark spoof of Southern preachers, turned a family ministry into a site for sex, murder and moneymaking.

But these imitations can’t match the reality. Swaggart was a larger-than-life minister whose story – from small-town wannabe to disgraced pastor, to preaching to those who would listen – had it all: sex, politics, music and religion.

For those who want a taste of the real thing, The King of Honky Tonk Heaven lives on. You can see his old services and Bible studies streaming daily on his network.

(Diane Winston, Professor and Knight Center Chair in Media & Religion, USC Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism. The views expressed in this commentary do not necessarily reflect those of Religion News Service.)

The Conversation religion coverage receives support through

 the AP’s collaboration with The Conversation US, with funding from

 Lilly Endowment Inc.  The Conversation is solely responsible for this content.