Why the Parties Switched Sides — and How Religion Made It Possible

The Republican Party once led the fight against slavery. Today, it’s home to America’s Christian nationalist movement. What happened?

In this episode, Mike breaks down how religion shaped every stage of the political party realignment, from Lincoln’s abolitionist Republicans to the rise of the evangelical right. Religion didn’t cause the switch, but it provided the moral vocabulary for both oppression and liberation.

Religion in American Politics: A Short History

Visit us at www.Atheistville.com for more content from Mike Smithgall and the Atheistville team

📺 Subscribe on YouTube: youtube.com/@atheistville

💬 Want to be a guest or submit a question? Drop us a note at CONTACT

Check us out at: https://atheistville.buzzsprout.com

🔥 New episodes weekly from Atheistville — Mike Drop with Mike Smithgall, Ask an Atheist, and The Unholy Roundtable

© 2025 Atheistville Media

Transcript

SPEAKER_00: 0:00

So recently, my friend Goodwin, an atheist in India and a keen observer of American culture, reached out to me. He was confused by a glaring contradiction. Republicans freed the slaves and Democrats opposed it. Yet today, the parties seem to stand on opposite sides of the racial and political spectrum. The nice thing about a foreigner asking these questions is they come with no preconceived baggage. It forces you, as an American, to dig into the facts and explain this monumental shift clearly. And if you tell most Americans that the Republican Party once led the fight to end slavery, they'll look at you like you're rewriting history. But it's true. Abraham Lincoln, the first Republican president, issue the Emancipation Proclamation. So how did the same party become the political home for white evangelical conservatism and for some of its fringes, the preferred identity of white nationalists? And how did the Democrats, the party once dominant in the segregated South, become the face of civil rights and inclusion? It's one of the most misunderstood shifts in American history. And behind it, quietly shaping both sides, was religion. It didn't cause the switch, but it translated it. It became the moral architecture for every major turning point. And that's what we're talking about today. Hey, thanks for tuning in. I'm Mike Smithgall, the unelected mayor of Atheistville, and this is today's mic drop. Let's start in the 1850s. The Republican Party is brand new. It's growing out of the ashes of the Whig Party and the anti-slavery movement. Lincoln's election triggers the South succession. This wasn't a secular debate, it was a Bible fight. Abolitionist Christians in the North preached that slavery was a sin against God and humanity, quoting scripture about freedom and equality. Meanwhile, ministers in the South used the same Bible to defend slavery, referencing passages like Ephesians 6.5, servants obey your masters. They argued that racial hierarchy was part of God's natural order. Both sides believed they had divine sanction. Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation was strategic, but it also reframed the war as a moral cause. The Union wasn't just fighting for preservation, it was fighting to end an evil institution. And here's the key the Republican Party of the 1860s were the reformers. They were using faith to challenge the status quo. The Democrats were the conservatives, defending tradition and the South's way of life. So when Goodwin asked, how did the party switch? the answer begins here. The two groups of Christians reading the same book and coming to opposite political conclusions. That pattern, religion used as a moral framework for power, never disappeared. It simply changed its affiliation. After the Civil War, Reconstruction attempts to rebuild the nation, integrate freed slaves, but this only hardens divisions. White Southerners began building a new regional identity, heavily wrapped in faith. They saw themselves as enduring punishment while maintaining purity against outside federal interferences. They weren't just resisting authority, they were defending what they believed was God's order. The Democratic Party became the political home for this identity, and religion provided the spiritual fuel. Southern churches, especially Baptists and Methodists, taught that racial hierarchy was natural and biblically ordained. The fusion of faith and regional resistance created the roots of the Bible belt. Meanwhile, black churches in the South became sanctuaries and centers of education, dignity, and resistance. They used the same scripture to preach liberation and equality. Once again, two sides derived conflicting theological claims from the same source. The Democrats controlled the South through Jim Crow and religious justification, providing white Southerners the language to say we're not just defending our culture, we're defending God's plan. Now, fast forward to the 1940s through the 1960s, the Democratic Party starts to change, with leaders like Truman and Johnson and Kennedy supporting civil rights, desegregation, and voting equality. This fractures the old coalition. White Southern Democrats, the Dixiecrats, didn't just disagree with this policy, they believed it violated the divine order. Their preachers reinforced this from the pulpit. And again, at the same time, black ministers like Martin Luther King used religion as language of liberation. His speeches were sermons, his marches, acts of faith, rooted in justice and equality. Two groups, same scripture, completely different interpretations. While Lyndon Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act in 1964, he reportedly said, We have lost the South for a generation. He was right. Southern white voters didn't leave the Democratic Party over economics. They left because they believed Democrats had abandoned a religious imperative. The Republican Party was more than ready to welcome them in. And this is a pivotal moment. Democrats became the party of federal intervention in civil rights. Republicans began attracting voters who viewed the intervention as a moral threat. The fight wasn't just about race, it was about who gets to speak for God. That battle defined the realignment. The 1970s and 80s brought another major shift. The social revolution of the 60s and 70s, including civil rights, women's rights, and of course, 1973, Roe vs. Wade decision, challenged traditional authority, creating an opening for conservative religious leaders. Figures like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson built movements like the moral majority. They blended religious language with political activism. They argued that America was losing its soul and Christians had a duty to take back the nation. Ronald Reagan understood this moral symbolism and spoke the language of faith fluently enough to make evangelicals feel heard. The Republican Party became not just the party of free markets, but the party of God and country. And that's crucial. Religion stopped being about personal conscience and became tribal identity. Being a Republican started to mean being a Christian for millions of voters. Democrats, meanwhile, leaned into pluralism and the separation of church and state. Religion moved from shaping the parties to defining them. If you were a conservative Christian, the Republican Party became your moral home. And the Democrat Party became the opposition, dare I say, the enemy. Political strategists realized that moral language mobilizes voters more effectively than policy details. Faith wasn't just influencing politics, it was becoming the politics, which brings us to today and the rise of Christian nationalism. This is the belief that America was founded as a Christian nation and should remain one. It's not primarily about personal faith, it's about political dominance dressed in religious language. Just look at the rhetoric. The same claim to divine will that defended slavery is now used to oppose reproductive rights. The same divine order that justified segregation is now invoked to oppose LGBTQ equality. The claim we're a Christian nation is used to justify exclusion and control. Many religious Americans are deeply opposed to Christian nationalism, but the political machinery that fused religion and Republican identity has made them impossible to separate. Here is how this answers Goodwin's question. The parties didn't just switch over economics or geography, they switched over their moral claims. The Republican Party of Lincoln used religion to fight for liberation. The Republican Party today uses religion to fight for control. The Democratic Party of the Jim Crow South used religion to defend oppression. The Democratic Party today uses a secular frame to defend pluralism. Religion didn't cause the flip, but it provided the language of righteousness. Once you understand that, American politics started to make a lot more sense, albeit no less maddening. This was never really about policy. It was always about power. And religion has often been used as the most effective way to make power sound holy. So, Goodwin, that's the answer to your question. The parties flipped because their moral coalition flipped. The Republican Party of Lincoln used faith as a rallying cry for liberty, but as the moral landscape shifted, it became the party that absorbed the religious identity of the segregated South, using scripture for control. The Democrats went in the opposite direction, shifting from defending Jim Crow to championing a pluralistic vision. You asked the question without bias and without baggage of growing up here. And that's the only way you can really see it clearly. Because if you grew up inside one of these camps, you inherit the story that makes your side the hero. Now I'm not a historian, but if you want to dig deeper, I highly recommend Religion in American Politics, a short history by Franklin Lambert. I'll go ahead and put the link in the description below. All right, so that's my two cents. Unblessed, unfiltered, as always. But through it all, religion was a spiritual engine. It gave abolitionists their authority, segregationists their defense, and the Christian nationalists their political power. If we don't understand how that moral authority gets weaponized, we'll keep mistaking power for piety and control for conviction. I'm Mike Smithgow. Thanks for tuning in, and I will catch you on the next one. Hey, do me a favor. If you like today's show, even if you disagree with me, go ahead and like and subscribe to the channel. It really does help us grow. And the biggest favor I would love to ask you to do is drop me a comment. I read every single one of them. Again, whether you agree with me or not, I do read them and I really do enjoy them. And if we can have a civil conversation that helps us both understand each other's perspectives a lot better. Hey, and tell a friend, by the way, maybe there's somebody else out there you think they would benefit from this kind of conversation, this open and reasoned and measured conversation. Let those people know. Um also make sure you check us out at our website. That's atheistville.com. These podcasts, as well as our YouTube and our blog articles, are all there. Again, that's atheistville.com. And that's about it. All right. Thanks a lot, and I will see you on the next one. Take care.