S6, Ep. 09: Threats to religious freedom from the Trump administration and a look at the growing resistance

In our second show of the second Trump administration, Amanda and Holly run through a list of recent events that point to a gross misunderstanding of what “religious freedom” means. They review the policy announcements made during the National Prayer Breakfast – including the creation of a task force to “eradicate anti-Christian bias” – and they look at how this administration’s accusations and actions are limiting the religious freedom of several Christian groups who serve others. They also discuss the growing resistance, including court challenges and two opportunities for action to share your views with Congress and the Trump administration. In the final segment, Amanda and Holly share how BJC is celebrating Black History Month with a special invitation. 

SHOW NOTES
Segment 1 (starting at 00:38): The National Prayer Breakfast and an anti-Chrisitan bias task force

Listen to Amanda and Holly’s previous conversations on the National Prayer Breakfast in the following episodes:

• S1, Ep. 01 in 2020, beginning at 28:44 into that first episode of this podcast series.
• S4, Ep. 11 in 2023, exploring the many questions it raises and how it differs from the National Day of Prayer. 

After the second event tied to the National Prayer Breakfast, President Trump released an executive order creating the White House Faith Office and announced his appointments to the office.

On the same day, he released an executive order creating the Task Force to Eradicate Anti-Christian Bias. Amanda posted her reaction to that action on Bluesky.

In her testimony before Congress in 2018, Amanda spoke about the need to acknowledge and address violence and rhetoric directed against religious minorities in the U.S. and abroad. 

 

Segment 2 (starting at 14:29): Executive order on education, lawsuits on immigration, and the rescinding of the sensitive locations memo

President Trump released an executive order titled “Expanding Educational Freedom and Opportunity for Families” and BJC shared our concerns in a statement about how such an act would undermine religious freedom. 

The Cooperative Baptist Fellowship joined the lawsuit filed by Quaker congregations challenging the removal of the “sensitive locations” guidance as a violation of religious freedom protections under the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). Read more about the lawsuit on our website. After we recorded this podcast, another lawsuit was filed by a number of religious denominations and organizations, including two supporting bodies of BJC: Fellowship Southwest and Convención Bautista Hispana de Texas. Read more from Baptist News Global.

 

Segment 3 (starting 24:10): Attacks on faith-based service providers and two opportunities for action

For more on the comments from Elon Musk, Mike Flynn and Vice President JD Vance targeting religious groups, read this article by Michelle Boorstein for The Washington Post: Attacks on Catholics, Lutherans suggest new Trump approach on religion

“Defunding and demonizing the government’s faith-based partners will make its job harder” is the title of the op-ed published by Religion News Service, written by Amanda alongside Aaron Dorfman from A More Perfect Union: The Jewish Partnership for Democracy and Jennifer Walker Thomas from Mormon Women for Ethical Government.

 

TWO ACTION STEPS YOU CAN TAKE IN THIS TIME:

1. Sign the letter calling on Congress and President Trump to provide necessary oversight to the Department of Government Efficiency, ensuring that the freedom for religious organizations to practice and honor their faith is not infringed upon by government action. It is organized by BJC, Mormon Women for Ethical Government, and A More Perfect Union: The Jewish Partnership for Democracy. Click here for the letter.
2. Tell your member of Congress to oppose House Resolution 59, which could condemn a sermon by Bishop Mariann Budde as a “distorted message.” No one has to agree with her message to oppose this resolution, which wrongly indicates that the government should decide what is acceptable in matters of religion. We have a simple form you can use to send your own message. Click here for our form.

We sent information about those two opportunities for action to people in our community who receive emails. If you would like to receive them, visit BJConline.org/subscribe to sign up for our email list!

Amanda and Holly discussed the U.S. v. Skrmetti case in episode 6 of season 6.

 

Segment 4 (starting 31:39): Celebrating Black History Month

Throughout Black History Month, BJC is sharing stories and insight on our Instagram and TikTok channels. Here are a few recent videos:

• Black history is American history
• Intersection of Black history and religious freedom
• Black artists

INVITATION: You are invited to a special livestream event on Friday, February 28, which will re-launch the book African Americans and Religious Freedom: New Perspectives for Congregations and Communities. Click here to learn more about the book and sign up for the event!

Respecting Religion is made possible by BJC’s generous donors. Your gift to BJC is tax-deductible, and you can support these conversations with a gift to BJC.

 

Transcript: Season 6, Episode 9: Threats to religious freedom from the Trump administration and a look at the growing resistance (some parts of this transcript have been edited for clarity)    

HOLLY: Does this administration really care about religious freedom the way they give lip service to?
AMANDA: I’m also concerned about what this new task force might actually find and label as “anti-Christian bias.”

 

Segment 1: The National Prayer Breakfast and an anti-Christian bias task force (starting at 00:38)

AMANDA: Welcome to Respecting Religion, a BJC podcast series where we look at religion, the law, and what’s at stake for faith freedom today. I’m Amanda Tyler, executive director of BJC.

HOLLY: And I’m general counsel Holly Hollman. On today’s episode, we’re going to talk about, well, what’s been happening in our country, particularly the trickle-down effects of the actions of the current administration and what we’re seeing both here, where I am in D.C., as well as in other places across the country and the globe.

AMANDA: I think every time we record, at least for this season, we need to mention the date and almost the time of day, because things are happening so quickly, so —

HOLLY: Context. Yeah.

AMANDA: We are talking and recording on Monday, February 10, in the afternoon, and between now and Thursday when this show will show up in podcast feeds, a lot of things could and probably will happen, so, listeners, just keep that in mind.

But as of today, this is our second episode that we have released during the second Trump administration, and last time we started with kind of a rundown of all the things that had happened in just the first few days. And so let’s just say that since then, the impact and the activity have only increased. You know, “constitutional crisis” is now a term that we are seeing nearly every day.

And, you know, we don’t want to be alarmists and hyperbolic on this show, but I think it’s fair to say that we are living in alarming and, indeed, hyperbolic times.

HOLLY: That’s right. Those terms are being used by people, I’d say, across a broader spectrum in our political environment than we normally see here in Washington. And we don’t promise to cover every story. We didn’t last week when we went through them, and we don’t promise to do that here, but we are your partners in understanding what’s going on in this country, trying to do our best to be good citizens, to be good Christian advocates and friends and neighbors in a very challenging environment.

We’re going to talk about some of these events and how we responded and how we’ve seen other people respond but specifically focusing on the way religious freedom has been talked about — the effect of specific policies that have been under attack and what that means for religious freedom — and just note some other Trump administration activities that we know you all care about and that affect how we live together.

AMANDA: Yeah. So just to begin, I think when we think about how the Trump administration is talking about religious freedom, I think we’re seeing quite a big disconnect between how we understand religious freedom and what’s actually being talked about in the public square.

And one of those events is an annual event called the National Prayer Breakfast. It always takes place, I think, on the first Thursday in February, or at least in recent memory, it has. So for this year’s National Prayer Breakfast, there were actually two events. There was the official event that was held in the Capitol, in the Capitol rotunda, and then there was the second event that was held off-site later in the day.

I want to start, Holly, by just saying, you know, we’ve done a few episodes about this event on this podcast, including our very first episode of this podcast, episode 1 of season 1 of February 2020.

HOLLY: Wow, yeah.

AMANDA: And, you know, we have some issues with the fact that there even is something called a National Prayer Breakfast, that this tends to blur the line between separation of church and state in meaningful ways and that we often don’t think it’s very helpful to instruct Americans that there is a particular day that the leaders will come together in prayer.

HOLLY: Yeah. Our listeners can find out more about the history of that event and the criticisms of it and, you know, the light fare where people come together across the aisle and sometimes actually from a variety of religions to be together, but often, as we point out, it heavily skews toward Christianity and this blurring of Christianity and being Americans in ways that can be confusing and harmful.

So, Amanda, I really appreciate you keeping your eye on it this year. What stood out to you as far as this president and this iteration of the National Prayer Breakfast?

AMANDA: Yeah, Holly. I kind of took one for our team by being the one to actually watch the address of what some people are calling now the Congressional Prayer Breakfast, because it’s the one that’s held with members of Congress at the Capitol.

You know, I first saw just a lot of repeating of “Christian nation” mythology by President Trump in his speech and things that are just not in line at all with the historical record, you know, saying things like, “From the earliest days of our republic, faith in God has always been the ultimate source of the strength that beats in the heart of our nation.”

He also said, “Deep in the soul of every patriot is the knowledge that God has a special plan and a glorious mission for America. It is his hand that guides us every single step of the way.”

HOLLY: That’s a lot.

AMANDA: It’s a lot. It’s a lot. And I will say that this idea of God’s providence has become a theme of Trump’s speech recently, particularly given the assassination attempt earlier.

HOLLY: Uh-huh.

AMANDA: I will also say this was clearly the scripted part of his speech, something I think that was an intentional insertion of Christian nation mythology into the subject matter of the speech. You know, I also found it, I think, a little galling that he invoked Roger Williams whom we view as kind of a hero of religious freedom — and particularly for Baptists since he did found the First Baptist Church in America. It was Roger Williams who once wrote that, “Forced worship stinks in God’s nostrils.”

To hear him invoked in the midst of this example of Christian nationalism just didn’t seem in line at all with Roger Williams. Roger Williams, I think, would almost certainly not approve of the idea of a National Prayer Breakfast or of what was coming out of President Trump’s mouth.

HOLLY: Yeah. For those of you who don’t know, that’s where we look for that language of separation. We find it in the words of Roger Williams, talking about “separating the garden of the church from the wilderness of the world.” So the idea that Roger Williams would be used in a speech that mixes so many ideas and ways that are harmful and confusing about America’s religious freedom tradition is upsetting.

AMANDA: And one National Prayer Breakfast was not enough, and so there was this second even that was held at the Washington Hilton, and it was during that speech, I think, that President Trump moved from kind of just this rhetoric of Christian nationalism to actually announcing some of the policies that he would be rolling out later that day. He described something called a Religious Liberty Commission but gave very few details about exactly what that would be.

He also announced that Pastor Paula White would be returning to the White House, this time to lead something called the Faith Office, the White House Faith Office. And then he also said that he was setting up a task force to be led by Attorney General Pam Bondi that would work on eradicating anti-Christian bias, which we did get more details on later that Thursday and which we’ll talk about in a moment.

HOLLY: But I’ll say this, appointing someone as head of the faith office following him saying earlier in the day, “We have to bring religion back; we have to bring it back much stronger” — really confusing.

Now, many of you know that there have been, since the George W. Bush era, offices throughout the federal government that deal with partnerships of faith groups and other community groups, working together and coordinating with government programs.

While administrations have named it different things, it’s typically been a government office, really focused on the coordinating of private and public sector social services and things that you can do perfectly constitutionally. This area always needs a careful eye to make sure that the government is not funding religion or preferring some religions over the other. But we understand those offices and how they’ve worked.

But it’ll be interesting to see what President Trump plans for this office. Of course, Pastor Paula White is no stranger. She had served previously in the earlier President Trump administration in the White House Faith and Opportunity Initiative. You know, these are different efforts of President Trump to talk about faith and government that are a break from what we’ve seen in earlier administrations.

AMANDA: I think even more concerning than that announcement, if you can believe it, was also this introduction of a special task force that would be led by the attorney general and that would consist of essentially the entire cabinet, focused on eradicating anti-Christian bias. We will link to that executive order in the show notes, so you can read about it, and we can also link to my reaction on behalf of BJC to the announcement.

You know, I found it incredibly hypocritical that a president that focused his first two weeks in office in trying to shut down all offices that looked into bias on all different kinds of identities and statuses would then reopen an office focused on bias, but focused exclusively on anti-Christian bias.

HOLLY: Yeah.

AMANDA: And it inflames these unfounded claims that there is rampant anti-Christian bias in a majority Christian nation. I think I’ve talked about this before Congress before, that claiming that there is widespread Christian bias — or anti-Christian bias in the United States –really draws away from the very real Christian persecution that happens in countries around the world today. And there just isn’t evidence of the fact that there is rampant anti-Christian bias in this country.

HOLLY: Yeah. I think this is the part that blew up my email and text messages, is like, Did you see that; what is this?; you know, what is going on here? We very quickly think about what’s going on in the world internationally, obviously not just against Christians, but Jews, Muslims, people of lots of different religious perspectives around the world are victims of persecution and very serious global conflicts or, you know, the breakdown of governments that could protect them.

For the president to lead with this as something that is distinctly important to fight in our own country really undercuts America and our role as a religious freedom leader, not just setting an example in our country but around the world.

AMANDA: As well as the very real bias and persecution that does happen in this country of religious minorities. We know that there are many, many more instances of antisemitism and anti-Muslim attacks and bias in this country than there are against Christians, particularly given that Christians so outnumber the people who are from other faith traditions. So I find this very insulting that there would be this special task force that would be focused on anti-Christian bias.

And I’m also concerned about what this new task force might actually find and label as anti-Christian bias, that this could be used as a tool, as I put it, to enforce a kind of theological conformity that will harm not — that will harm everyone, you know, including other Christians who are viewed to not be part of whatever is considered to be orthodox or considered to be favored and supported and protected by this administration.

HOLLY: Yeah. And this is one area where we need to speak up, and we all need to exercise our religious freedom. And our religious freedom provides protection to speak religiously and to exercise religion from all different perspectives. That’s not something that we give over to the president. It’s not something where the government speaks for us as a nation religiously. I mean, that’s really foundational to our religious liberty perspective.

And so, yeah. I join you, Amanda, very much concerned about that. That’s why we all should be thinking about, what is this ideology of Christian nationalism, how do be on guard against it, how to speak up against it, how to make sure that we continue to be the religiously diverse country that we are, and that we stand for each other’s rights.

 

 

Segment 2: Executive order on education, lawsuits on immigration, and the rescinding of the sensitive locations memo (starting at 14:29)

HOLLY: But there are other actions taken recently that are more explicit, Amanda. You’ve seen some, and we’ve spoken out against some, particularly in the big pile of executive orders that he issued.

AMANDA: And the pile of executive orders you can now find at WhiteHouse.gov by going through presidential actions, but you have to scroll through several pages just to see what’s been happening in the last couple of weeks.

He issued an executive order on January 29 entitled, Expanding Educational Freedom and Opportunity for Families, in which he purports to divert money from public schools to private schools, including private religious education. Now, I am using the word “purports to” very intentionally, because I think it’s very important as we read not just this executive order but all of these executive actions, that many of these actions seem to be outside the powers of the president to do.

And many of these, in order to accomplish their ends, would require acts of Congress or some other action from our constitutional system that is outside the powers of the president. But it clearly was a policy announcement that this administration is going to try to defund public schools in order to fund private education, including private religious education.

On the same day that President Trump issued that executive order, BJC issued a statement noting our opposition to the action and explaining that public funds should be used for public uses and that the government should not compel taxpayers to furnish funds in support of religion, regardless of whether they adhere to that religion or not.

We — as we have talked about many times on Respecting Religion, Holly — have grave concerns about this move to privatizing public education, because we feel like religious freedom will be harmed for a number of reasons: because public money will go to fund religion directly, which is against some of the foundational ideas of our constitutional republic, but also because public schools are laboratories of democracy where people can encounter people who worship and think and live differently than they do and that we know that public schools protect religious freedom in ways that are important to supporting our entire society. And so it’s very concerning to see this public money going to private education.

HOLLY: Yeah. And the EO showed several different ways that he would try to do that, that he ordered his administration to seek that, to move money from one program to the other. As you said, Amanda, it’s not clear that he can do all of these things, but it was an explicit way to move forward this agenda that we saw early on.

When he talked about what his vision for education in America was, it was pretty radical. It was all about this move toward privatization, very little concern for the important role that public education plays throughout our country and all the different ways that, you know, public education is sometimes really the heartbeat of a community. And it appears that, instead, he’s very focused on diverting tax dollars to private use.

AMANDA: And the executive order explicitly gives some deadlines to different people: the Secretary of Education and the Secretary of Health and Human Services, as well as Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Interior, to make recommendations and reports within 60 or 90 days, depending on the official.

And so once we get those reports back from these cabinet members, we will have a better idea of what exactly the plan would be and can evaluate then what the impact might be and what is actually legal and possible from this administration versus what would be another example of a constitutional crisis if the administration tries to do things that are outside of its control and really within the purview of Congress.

HOLLY: I will say that’s been one positive note in this flurry of confusion. You know, presidents kind of can speak in a bold way to say their vision: This is what I’m going to do — and sometimes actually assert power that they don’t have, almost as a communication device, to see what they can get away with.

Of course, we’ve not seen anyone do it this aggressively, so these commentators who have taught me this history lesson have also told me that they hadn’t seen anything like this. And we have seen some quick action in the courts by public interest groups to quickly bring lawsuits to stop some of his most aggressive actions that directly affect people’s jobs instantly or constitutional rights.

AMANDA: And I think one example of one of those actions and then resulting lawsuits is in another area of immigration in particular where this administration rescinded a prior policy that said that enforcement by agents, including ICE agents, would not happen at sensitive locations, sensitive locations being places like schools, hospitals, and notably for our conversation, Holly, houses of worship.

And we saw right away there was a lawsuit filed, initially by a group of Quakers, challenging this new White House immigration policy. We have also recently learned that one of the supporting denominational bodies of Baptist Joint Committee, the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, has joined this lawsuit as another plaintiff.

And so here is another check, again, on executive power, that these groups are challenging this policy under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act as a denial of religious freedom. We will see this case go through the legal process and see if there is, indeed, a statutory check on this exercise of executive power.

HOLLY: That policy about sensitive locations has been around for decades, and while a lot of people may not have focused on it until now, I think they will, as they think about ICE agents coming to enforce policy at hospitals or schools or during weddings or funerals or church services. It seems so unnecessary. It seems, you know, violent to the peace and order that we need as a society.

That memo was really based on the idea that the government, when they conduct enforcement actions, they have to consider a lot of factors. They need to think about the location and the impact on the people, on all of the people that would be affected by enforcing the law at these sensitive locations.

I think these lawsuits are really important, and we’ll see. Does this administration really care about religious freedom the way they give lip service to? Or are they going to like use churches as places that they’re going to enforce their immigration laws in ways that harm the churches’ abilities to come together to serve people without regard to status? A lot of ministries provide services very broadly, and they don’t ask for documentation as they do their ministry or as they come together and worship.

AMANDA: I think we also have to think about, what is the intended impact of orders like these? And one of those is to scare people from going about their daily lives, to scare people from seeking medical treatment that they need, or sending their children to school, or going to worship in their house of worship.

And the chilling impact that that will have on people who are afraid for themselves or afraid for their family members and what that does to people’s lives, and I think these lawsuits help bring to the forefront what impact this has on the houses of worship themselves, the houses of worship who have welcomed people into their communities, who themselves might be reticent to go to church because they don’t want the service interrupted in the middle with federal agents barging in to make arrests.

I think what this does to our society — and I think the word you used is “violence,” and I think that’s right. You know, this violent aspect of our society, of having these enforcement actions that could happen at any time, in any places that we hold literally sacred in our houses of worship, I think, is really a profound impact on religious freedom in this country, and I’m grateful for the attorneys and the plaintiffs who are bringing these lawsuits and bringing this into our national conversation.

 

 

Segment 3: Attacks on faith-based service providers and two opportunities for action (starting at 24:10)

AMANDA: Another developing story over the past couple of weeks is Elon Musk and his attempts to close the agency USAID and to fire all of those workers, both here and around the world who work for that agency. I say this is ongoing, because it is not at all clear that this is a legal action, because Congress appropriated these funds to this agency, and it does not appear that this is within the power of the executive branch, let alone of Elon Musk who is neither elected nor confirmed to an official government position to do this.

As part of this unfolding story, Elon Musk also lifted up comments that were made initially by Michael Flynn, discredited general and also one of the stars of the ReAwaken America Tour, who said on Twitter and accused a Lutheran social service organization of, quote/unquote, money laundering and accused them of other criminal activity, just because they were a recipient of government funds in order to provide aid to populations around the world.

And those comments from Flynn that were then upped by Musk on Twitter really sounded quite a bit like comments that Vice President JD Vance made last month, where he criticized the U.S. Catholic church and some of their social service work, suggesting — and this is just incredible to me, but suggesting that the church was just motivated by money and then also said that it was working with millions of, quote/unquote, illegal immigrants.

So there’s this trend evidently from members of the administration to attack and go after religious organizations that have been partnering with the government for many years to provide important social service work and relief work, not just here in the United States but around the world.

HOLLY: Yeah. So it’s not just an attack on government, which we knew this administration would do. That was a huge part of their plan. But this is specifically religious actors working in cooperation and concert with government in very important ways. And this broad and harsh attack, you know, has immediate impact.

I’m glad, Amanda, that you could address some of this in a joint op-ed that was published by Religion News Service that had the title, “Defunding and demonizing the government’s faith-based partners will make its job harder.” And we’ll put a link to that in the show notes, but you co-authored that alongside Aaron Dorfman and Jennifer Walker Thomas and, you know, explained this longstanding cooperation between religious nonprofits and the government to do a lot of important things to take care of people and to promote democracy abroad.

AMANDA: And then with those leaders from Mormon Women for Ethical Government and A More Perfect Union: The Jewish Partnership for Democracy, BJC is also co-sponsoring an action and something that our listeners can be a part of and can spread to other people.

It’s called an Interfaith Call for Congress and President Trump to Ensure Religious Freedom, and it particularly calls on Congress and the president to provide the necessary oversight to the newly created Department of Government Efficiency that is being run by Elon Musk, to ensure that the freedom for religious organizations to practice and honor their faith is not infringed upon by government action.

And so we will include a link to that action in show notes, and it is open for signature and action from any member of any faith tradition, and it’s also open for co-sponsorship from other faith-based organizations.

And we have another opportunity for listeners to take action. BJC put out an action alert over our concern of a piece of pending legislation, House Resolution 59. The title of that resolution is this: “Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the sermon given by the Right Rev. Mariann Edgar Budde at the National Prayer Service on January 21 at the National Cathedral was a display of political activism and condemning its distorted message.”

We condemn this idea that it is Congress’s role to police religious matters, that whether or not you agree with the sermon that Bishop Budde gave, it is decidedly not the role of government to be involved in religious affairs in this way, and so we are asking people to contact their member of Congress and ask them to oppose House Resolution 59. We think that this is a disturbing trend that we’re seeing, that members of Congress, that members of the administration are criticizing faith leaders that dare to criticize them and not just criticize them but try to discredit them or try to silence them in different ways.

And so we hope that people will check out this action alert. We shared this, Holly, a couple of weeks ago with our audience, and we’re really so pleased by the response that we got. We got just within a couple of days of sending this out, we learned that more than 14,000 people in our network had written their member of Congress. People are looking for things to do and are really encouraged that people are getting involved in democracy in this way right now.

HOLLY: Thank you for all who have joined in that, and we hope others will, and we’ll continue to watch Congress and hopefully steer away from such action in the future.

Well, Amanda, I feel like we’ve really only scratched the surface, and yet we have shown some pretty deep and concerning activity over the past couple of weeks. We can note that we saw some other things that we sort of expected from this administration, including that they dropped out of the Skrmetti case that we covered in an earlier episode of Respecting Religion. That’s a case that challenges a Tennessee law that does not allow certain gender-affirming care.

And we covered those oral arguments, and of course, the Biden administration was part of the challenge to that state law, and the Trump administration has come in and said, no, they will not be part of that anymore. So I don’t know exactly how that will affect the Court’s ruling in this, but it’s disappointing but not surprising that this administration will not have the same standards of equal protection that we saw in the previous administration that presented that case before the Court.

 

Segment 4: Celebrating Black History Month (starting at 31:39)

AMANDA: Holly, we’re having our conversation during the month of February, which, of course, is the month we celebrate as Black History Month. At BJC, we are using our voice and our social media channels to celebrate, and we hope you will join us as we honor the legacy, the struggles and the triumphs of Black Americans, acknowledging the past and inspiring a more just and equitable future.

And so most of the videos are posted on Instagram and TikTok, so we hope you will join us there. We also want to invite you to a very special event that will be held on livestream on February 28 in which we will celebrate the relaunch of the book African Americans and Religious Freedom: New Perspectives for Congregations and Communities.

The book is a collection of essays that provide novel interpretations of religious freedom, informed by African American culture, history, ideas and religious experiences. It was first released in January 2021, two days before the January 6 attack on the Capitol. And in this new edition, a new preface addresses the need for religious freedom to undergo a deep interrogation in these perilous times.

HOLLY: It is edited by our colleague and former Respecting Religion guest Dr. Sabrina E. Dent, who is the director of BJC’s Center for Faith, Justice and Reconciliation, and Dr. Corey D.B. Walker, dean of the School of Divinity and Wake Forest professor of the humanities at Wake Forest University.

We’ll put a link in our show notes to sign up for the livestream and where you can learn more. The livestream will be at 10 a.m. Eastern time, 9 a.m. Central time, from Washington, D.C., featuring the editors and some of the contributors, and you can see details on our website. So don’t miss it.

That brings us to the close of this episode of Respecting Religion. Thanks for joining us. For more information on what we discussed, visit our website at RespectingReligion.org for show notes and a transcript of this program.

AMANDA: Respecting Religion is produced and edited by Cherilyn Guy.

HOLLY: You can learn more about the work of BJC defending faith freedom for all by visiting our website at BJConline.org.

AMANDA: We’d love to hear from you. You can send both of us an email by writing to [email protected]. We are also on social media @BJContheHill, and you can follow me on X and Bluesky and Threads @AmandaTylerBJC.

HOLLY: If you enjoyed this show, share it with others. Take a moment to leave us a review or a five star rating to help more people find it.

AMANDA: We also want to thank you for supporting this podcast. You can donate to these conversations by visiting the link in our show notes.

HOLLY: Join us next time for a new conversation Respecting Religion.