How does Christianity align with political parties and policies?
Christ ultimately transcends party politics. But, as I have stated so often, some political parties can be closer to biblical concerns and values than others. And with the polarisation ramping up in America, Australia and elsewhere, we may need to speak less about right versus left and more about good versus evil.
Sure, no party is pure evil nor pure good. But some are closer in one direction than the other. Thus in many places and many cases we see more and more of an alignment between evil and the left. Some of the core concerns for the believer are increasingly falling along the left side of the divide. The sanctity of life is just one clear example of this.
A major arena of moral conflict and debate involves the so-called culture wars. As I and others have repeatedly said, it was not OUR side that started them. The war on marriage and family came from the left. The war on the unborn came from the left. The assault on all the big-ticket items such as religious liberty and freedom of speech comes from the secular left.
So when believers get involved in the culture wars, they can more or less decide which side of politics best represents their concerns. While the Republicans in America and the Coalition in Australia have been far from where they should be on many of these core issues, the Democrats and Labor are much more clearly aligned. They certainly are NOT the parties of life and biblical sexual morality.
In the days ahead there might be some research done on how Christians voted in the recent Australian federal election. But detailed studies have already been undertaken on this regarding last November’s American election. And it has found a “clear moral divide”.
That is the title of an important new article by Andrew Walker, a professor of Christian ethics at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. The title and subtitle of his piece read as follows:
“A clear moral divide
It’s not hard to explain why Christians vote Republican”
Two of the core concerns for Christians SHOULD be the life issues and marriage and family issues. Two experts in these fields have just promoted Walker’s piece. The prolife champion Scott Klusendorf said this about it:
Stellar article from Andrew Walker. Christians don’t vote GOP because they are hack partisans or crave power. They do so to limit the evil of an alternative party that is Hell-bent on destroying human lives and undermining what is true, beautiful, and good. So sad when big name Evangelical leaders castigate lay Christians who possess a clearer moral compass than their alleged betters.
And the expert on human sexuality, Robert Gagnon, made this remark:
Good piece by Andrew Walker. One can put it even more bluntly: The Democratic Party, by virtue of having as its two greatest idols (LGBTQ immorality and abortion) evils that assault the two most important elements of creation (humans made in God’s image, the design of male and female as sexual counterparts), must be viewed as demonic. Add to this the demonic means by which they try to secure these twin evil idols: threats to speech, religion, child safety, women’s privacy and safety, education, employment, court appointments, and election integrity. This provides all the justification Christians need for consistently voting against Democratic candidates.
With those high words of praise, let me then feature the entire piece by Walker:
*****
This may come as a surprise to many journalists and academics, but the main reason that evangelical Christians tend to vote Republican in large majorities is not out of a slavish devotion to right-wing politics or an obsession with power.
Consider a recent comment made by the political scientist Ryan Burge on X (formerly Twitter). According to a graphic that Burge created, among white voters, the Democrats’ main voting coalition is people who never attend church. In stark contrast, the Republican’s primary coalition is people who attend church once a year or more.
What explains this? Is it a raw desire for political self-aggrandizement? Is it just a coincidence? Is it because Christians look favorably upon Donald Trump’s bravado and narcissism? Or, perhaps, is it because the parties allow themselves to be shaped more or less favorably by the values of religious voters?
One explanation I’ve offered previously looked at the architecture of conservative thought and explained how it more easily aligns with the architecture of Christian thought. That does not mean they are the same. It only means there are resemblances between the ideas of Christianity and conservatism that more naturally align than is the case with Christianity and progressivism.
There is another angle to consider.
For the sake of argument to demonstrate that Christians are not simply Republicans by arbitrary fiat, consider two alternate scenarios. Imagine in the first scenario that the modern Democratic Party held broadly conservative values. Perhaps it is the party less hostile to Christian values. In that situation, it is easy to assume that Christians would vote for Democrats more often.
Imagine in the second scenario that both parties do not have wildly divergent beliefs about fundamental questions related to human nature, the definition of family, the place of religion in society, the existence of objective truth, or basic justice. This would be the case of the two platforms that existed in, in large part, in previous generations.
Imagine the main differences were between taxation, the size and scope of government, how best to protect laborers, or how best to incentivize family formation. I would almost certainly predict in such a situation that there would be far more political diversity among Christians. In fact, let me go on record stating that this would be a far more preferable scenario. We should long for a political ecosystem where basic aspects of common sense and the common good were not up for debate. While I prefer smaller government and smaller taxes, I can acknowledge that Christians of good faith may come to different conclusions than me on some of these questions. That, in turn, would mean that the political spread of Christians would look more diffuse and divergent.
The common denominator for why Christians vote Republican in today’s context is not political obeisance for the sake of political obeisance. The common denominator is biblical commitment and the ability to effectuate those commitments in tangible ways, often in public policy. The Republican Party—though imperfect, flawed, and full of shortcomings fully deserving of criticism—supports and maintains an openness towards the values of Christians that the modern Democrat party simply does not.
Once it is understood that the political divide in contemporary America is, at its core, a moral divide—and that moral reasoning is inescapably shaped by underlying religious or metaphysical commitments—it follows that the fundamental distinction between the major political parties lies in the extent to which each permits itself to be guided by religiously informed moral values. While party identities may evolve over time, the modern Democratic Party has become institutionally aligned with a secular progressive framework that is, in its foundational assumptions, incompatible with a biblical moral vision.
Burge’s analysis also helps explain why certain self-styled “evangelical” thought leaders at mainstream outlets who scold evangelicals for voting Republican either lack discernment, wish to impugn a politically acceptable scapegoat, nurse grudges, or deliberately ignore reality. When the Democratic mainstream increasingly reflects a fusion of sexual progressivism, weaponized identity politics, and economic statism, it’s not difficult to understand why evangelicals—despite the flaws and shortcomings of the GOP—opt for the alternative. The two parties are not morally equivalent, and to pretend otherwise by injecting ambiguity between them is a transparent maneuver that fools no one but the pundits making it. Perhaps Christians who vote Republican understand the dynamics of political realism better than those who wish to make Christian political activism an act of vanity or performative condescension.
There is no permanent relationship between Christians and the Republican Party. It is a simple contingency of the political moment that the Republican Party is less hostile to the concerns of Christians than Democrats. Perhaps that will change over time, but in the meantime, refusing to acknowledge more honest and outspoken realities than ascribing unspoken motivations and cynical reductions to political gamesmanship betrays honest thinking. https://wng.org/opinions/a-clear-moral-divide-1746935589
*****
It can be said in closing that America and Australia of course differ in many ways. One difference is that Australia is more secular than America. That shows with the moral dividing line in Australia being less clear cut. With too many in the Liberal and National parties not willing to stand up for human life, or who equivocate on all the latest sexual radicalism, the choices for conservatives and Christians are sadly less clearly delineated.
That is a real pity of course. When you have leaders in the so-called conservative parties running away from issues like abortion, or refusing to answer a simple question such as ‘What is a woman?,’ then you know we are in trouble. Which is why in my piece yesterday I reflected on what might well be the end of the Federal Coalition in Australia: https://billmuehlenberg.com/2025/05/13/quick-thoughts-on-the-australian-state-of-play/
But regardless of where a believer lives, it should be obvious that some issues are not negotiable. Standing up for innocent life should be one such core value. And adhering to the biblical views on marriage, family and sexuality should be another.
Right now the Coalition in Australia is not too strong on either one. But Labor, the Greens and the Teals are clearly much worse. So there ARE some differences to be found here. But if the Coalition keeps embracing the lie that it must keep shifting more to the left, soon there will be absolutely no differences at all on these major moral matters.
That could well mean the end of Australia as a great nation.
