Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Politics informed by faith, religion and spirituality

The intersection of church and state
KingWu/Getty Images

Molineaux is co-publisher of The Fulcrum and president/CEO of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.

This week, we are asking you, our readers, to reflect on this question, and share your responses with us:

During our turbulent and challenging times, how does your faith, religion or spirituality inform your politics?

I don’t normally weigh in on these questions, preferring to ask thoughtful questions and then maintaining a respectful silence to hear your views. However, this question feels particularly poignant for me, since I’m in a Buddhist exploration of the Sacred Warrior practice. But I didn’t start here. And my path has been anything but straight.


My early life was spent in the Southern Baptist church. On Sundays I would spend time with my grandmother, who did not approve of or like my stepfather. It was our special time together. I would attend Sunday school as she worked in the church office, then we would attend the service together. It was the hellfire and brimstone style of preaching. I spent most services reading my Bible, the children’s living Bible version. The stories were more compelling than the angry man on the dais. And, of course, we stopped at McDonald’s after church, buying extra french fries to eat on the way home.

My grandmother provided the first implement in my spiritual tool box: a connection to others who loved me as I was.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

As a teenager, I attended a different Southern Baptist church with my high school sweetheart. We were both baptized in the church and I was … disappointed. The baptism had not erased my doubts or led to feelings of inclusion, which was my (immature) expectation. After drama with my family, I left home, left the church and struck out on my own. I entered my angry years, becoming an atheist for a time.

The second tool in my spiritual tool box was boundary setting.

As my mom and I worked on improving our relationship, she invited me to a church she found helpful. It was a new thought faith — now called the Centers for Spiritual Living — where I quenched my longing for spiritual community. But as a friend quipped, “It’s like an Amway meeting for God.” I burned out with the continual improvement required to be “growing on the edge.” I decided I was “good enough for now” and left the church.

The third tool in my spiritual tool box was self-acceptance.

Over the next 10-15 years, I was “unchurched.” At the same time, I felt deeply connected to my many communities and my work, and faithful in my self-growth. I attended many workshops aimed at personal growth or self-actualization, all of which presented new spiritual tools for me to use. During this period, I acquired:

Eventually, I found myself longing for a faith community, where we could practice and discuss the ethical and moral dilemmas. I started Judaism conversion classes. Nearing completion, I saw a widening schism in the congregation between the conservative, pro-Israel and progressive, pro-humanity members. I did not convert, as I (mistakenly) believed it wasn’t my conflict.

My spiritual tool box was still missing tools when I entered my political life. After running for office (the first and only time), I felt shunned by my friends who were disinterested in politics or making the world a better place. I no longer fit with a material-driven mindset. This is when I began to be a bridger between different partisans, faith communities, social groups and more.

After several more years in the spiritual wilderness, dabbling in eastern philosophy, women’s groups, meditation, yoga, shamanic journeys and other practices where I found connection, I attended my first meditation retreat. The retreat used the Tibetan traditions (Mahāyāna) of Buddhism, but was informed by Western psychology, indigineous rituals and shamanism.

I added a tool of non-attachment, while remaining grounded in strong, life-centered values.

All of my spiritual tools are aspects I use daily for the inevitable transformation of our political culture. The template of a healthy political culture is already inside us. It is a culture where we:

  • Connect instead of conquer.
  • Are sovereign and interdependent.
  • Love others as we love ourselves.
  • Focus on what we want.
  • Act with curiosity towards new and different people, ideas, cultures.
  • Trust in each other that “we’ve got your back” as we evolve our social contract that in turn, informs our politics.

I am in a Sacred Warrior class to explore — and co-design — a curriculum for 21st century life, based on the ancient, time-proven values and practices that were developed centuries ago for a different culture and lifestyle. The tools I’ve accumulated provide the means. Regardless of our faith, religion or spiritual practice, we all must provide the will to use our faith in healthy and uplifting ways.

Thank you for your attention and for reading this column. Your take on how your faith, religion or spirituality has informed your politics is greatly appreciated and I look forward to reading every answer.

Tell us how your faith, religion or spirituality inform your politics by Thursday at 9 a.m. ET. We will publish a selection of reader submissions on Feb. 11.

Read More

Donald Trump and J.D. Vance

Vice presidential candidate J.D. Vance, standing next to former President Donald Trump at the Republican National Convention, said President Biden's campaign rhetoric "led directly to President Trump's attempted assassination."

Robert Gauthier/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images

Assassination attempt will fuel political extremism

Khalid is a physician, geostrategic analyst and freelance writer.

President Joe Biden’s initial response to the attack on Donald Trump, calling it “sick” and reaching out to his stricken adversary to express support, was commendable. Statements from other prominent Democrats, including former President Barack Obama and Vice President Kamala Harris, as well as notable Republicans like former President George W. Bush and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, echoed this sentiment of unity and concern.

In contrast, the response from some on the right — engaging in finger-pointing and blaming Democrats for their heated rhetoric — proved less productive. Vice presidential candidate J.D. Vance, for instance, asserted that Biden's campaign rhetoric "led directly to President Trump's attempted assassination," seemingly in reaction to recent comments from Biden suggesting, "It’s time to put Trump in a bullseye." This divisive rhetoric only exacerbates the political tension that already grips the nation. Instead of fostering unity, such accusations deepen the partisan divide.

Keep ReadingShow less
Hands coming together in a circle of people
SDI Productions/Getty Images

Building a future together based on a common cause

Johnson is a United Methodist pastor, the author of "Holding Up Your Corner: Talking About Race in Your Community" and program director for the Bridge Alliance, which houses The Fulcrum.

As the 2024 presidential campaigns speed toward November, we face a transformative moment for our nation. The challenges of recent years have starkly revealed the deep divisions that threaten our societal fabric. Yet, amidst the discord, we are presented with a pivotal choice: Will we yield to the allure of division, or will we summon the courage to transcend our differences and shape a future founded on common cause and mutual respect?

Keep ReadingShow less
People protesting laws against homelessness

People protest outside the Supreme Court as the justices prepared to hear Grants Pass v. Johnson on April 22.

Matt McClain/The Washington Post via Getty Images

High court upholds law criminalizing homelessness, making things worse

Herring is an assistant professor of sociology at UCLA, co-author of an amicus brief in Johnson v. Grants Pass and a member of the Scholars Strategy Network.

In late June, the Supreme Court decided in the case of Johnson v. Grants Pass that the government can criminalize homelessness. In the court’s 6-3 decision, split along ideological lines, the conservative justices ruled that bans on sleeping in public when there are no shelter beds available do not violate the Constitution’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment.

This ruling will only make homelessness worse. It may also propel U.S. localities into a “race to the bottom” in passing increasingly punitive policies aimed at locking up or banishing the unhoused.

Keep ReadingShow less
silhouettes of people arguing in front of an America flag
Pict Rider/Getty Images

'One side will win': The danger of zero-sum framings

Elwood is the author of “Defusing American Anger” and hosts thepodcast “People Who Read People.”

Recently, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito was surreptitiously recorded at a private event saying, about our political divides, that “one side or the other is going to win.” Many people saw this as evidence of his political bias. In The Washington Post, Perry Bacon Jr. wrote that he disagreed with Alito’s politics but that the justice was “right about the divisions in our nation today.” The subtitle of Bacon’s piece was: “America is in the middle of a nonmilitary civil war, and one side will win.”

It’s natural for people in conflict to see it in “us versus them” terms — as two opposing armies facing off against each other on the battlefield. That’s what conflict does to us: It makes us see things through war-colored glasses.

Keep ReadingShow less