Book SummaryAmerican Crusade, by Andrew L. Seidel

1-Page Summary1-Page Book Summary of American Crusade

Supreme Court's Favoritism of Conservative Christian Beliefs Over Others

Seidel argues that the Roberts-led Supreme Court has consistently favored conservative Christian beliefs in matters concerning religious liberty, frequently to the detriment of non-Christian and minority religions. This favoritism is evident in a series of decisions that privilege Christian claims while dismissing or minimizing those of other faiths. The author identifies this pattern as part of a larger effort by a network of well-funded, conservative Christian legal organizations, which he terms "Crusaders", who are working to exploit religious freedom, redefining it as a means to Christian dominance rather than a universal right.

Favoring Christians Over Non-Christians in Matters of Religious Freedom

The Supreme Court under Chief Justice John Roberts demonstrates a clear preference for Christians over non-Christians in similar cases concerning religious liberty. This partiality reflects a broader pattern of Christian legal supremacy, where the court consistently prioritizes conservative Christian values and practices over others. Seidel argues that this bias is not about genuine religious freedom but an attempt to favor a shrinking demographic facing a more diverse America. This is less about upholding the country's founding document and more about maintaining the cultural dominance of Christianity.

Executing a Muslim Inmate Despite Religious Rights Request, Staying Executions of Christians With Similar Appeals

Seidel argues that the court's favoritism toward Christians manifests in a double standard evident in death penalty cases involving appeals for religious liberty. In Domineque Ray's case, a Black Muslim on death row in Alabama, the court refused to delay his execution despite an egregious violation of Ray’s religious freedom. Ray requested the presence of an Imam in the execution room, as Christian inmates are routinely granted the presence of a Christian chaplain. The court dismissed Ray’s appeal for this small accommodation with a brief opinion that didn't refer to religious freedom, the Constitution, or the First Amendment.

By contrast, the court halted the executions of two Christian inmates, Patrick Murphy in Texas and Willie Smith in Alabama, who requested their pastors' presence during the execution. These stays were granted with comprehensive briefing, oral hearings, and support from Crusader organizations. This disparate treatment—two paragraphs and an execution for a Muslim, full briefing and oral arguments, a stay of execution, and defense by the Crusaders for Christians—shows the court's blatant preference for people of the Christian faith and its readiness to dismiss similar claims from non-Christians.

Practical Tips

• Volunteer with or donate to organizations that work towards prison reform and inmates' rights, specifically those that focus on religious equality. Your involvement could range from administrative support to participating in campaigns that highlight the need for diverse religious representation and support within the penal system.
• Engage in a personal reflection exercise where you journal about your thoughts and feelings regarding spiritual support in difficult times. Write about how you might want to receive spiritual care if you were in a situation similar to those facing execution. This introspective activity can help you empathize with those who seek chaplaincy services and understand the importance of such support systems in high-stress environments.
• Consider writing to your local representatives to express your views on the importance of spiritual presence during critical life moments. This doesn't require specialized skills but can make a real impact on policy and awareness. Your letters could highlight personal stories or hypothetical scenarios that illustrate the comfort and strength individuals may draw from spiritual accompaniment during their final moments.
• Start a letter-writing campaign to raise awareness about issues facing incarcerated individuals. Writing letters to elected officials, local newspapers, or even to the individuals themselves can be a powerful way to advocate for fair treatment and support. This could involve organizing a group of friends to write letters on a specific topic each month.

Accepting Altered Facts and Frivolous Legal Arguments From Christians

Seidel argues that the nation's highest court is willing to overlook evidence and legal precedent to deliver victories for Christians. The author provides two examples to illustrate this point: 1) The court's decision in Town of Greece v. Galloway, upholding prayer invoking Christianity during the town's council meetings despite evidence that the prayers were directed at the public and not the council members, and 2) The court’s decision in the case of Trinity Lutheran Church vs. Comer, ignoring the church's repeated admissions that the playground receiving public funds was a ministry intended for proselytization.

In the case of Town of Greece v. Galloway, the judiciary overlooked the uncontested reality that the prayer podium was turned toward the audience instead of the council members when clergy delivered the prayers. This deliberate action by the city showcased the Christian prayers to everyone present, clearly violating their entitlement to a government that's secular. By misrepresenting this fact, the court enabled the city to impose a particular religion on the public, further eroding the division between government and religious institutions.

In the case involving Trinity Lutheran Church and Comer, the Supreme Court deliberately overlooked that taxpayer-funded grant was intended for a children's ministry designed to proselytize non-Christian children. The court embraced the Crusaders' PR message, framing the case as about "playground safety" rather than taxpayer funding of religion. This deliberate obfuscation allowed the judiciary to...

American Crusade Summary The Supreme Court Is Dismantling Legal Principles of Religious Liberty

Seidel contends that three fundamental principles guide religious freedom jurisprudence, which the nation's highest court is steadily dismantling. First, a clear line separates beliefs and actions: the right to believe is absolute, while actions based on those beliefs are not. Second, the exercise of religious freedom is limited by the rights of others, so someone's religion cannot be used to impede another person's rights. Finally, separating religion from government is crucial for guaranteeing authentic religious freedom by preventing governmental coercion and promotion of particular religions.

The Distinction Between Thought and Deed

Seidel argues that the First Amendment offers robust protections for religious freedom but contends that it does so by drawing a clear line between religious belief and actions. The ability to take action based on those beliefs is not absolute. The government cannot impede on the right of individuals to hold religious beliefs. However, the government can regulate religiously motivated actions to ensure public safety, welfare, and the rights of others.

Protecting Belief Rights, Prohibiting Government-Imposed Religion

Seidel emphasizes...

American Crusade Summary Using the RFRA to Promote Conservative Beliefs and Establish Christian Dominance

Seidel claims that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), initially backed by both liberals and conservatives, has been taken over by the Crusaders to promote Christian dominance in religious liberty jurisprudence. Rather than restoring the religious freedom rights supposedly lost in the case of Employment Division v. Smith (the drug counselor case), RFRA has become a tool to impose a conservative Christian agenda on all Americans, allowing believers to claim exemptions from virtually any law based on sincerely held religious convictions.

The Crusaders’ long-term strategy appears to be to use RFRA as a stepping-stone to reshape First Amendment religious liberty protections. If this effort is successful, religious freedom will prioritize conservative Christian beliefs.

Why the RFRA Was Passed

The RFRA was meant to "restore" a standard of religious freedom supposedly undermined by the Supreme Court's 1990 decision in Employment Division v. Smith, the drug counselor case. Despite the title and legislative intent, RFRA did not restore a previously existing standard, but instead offered a fresh interpretation of religious freedom that has proven more problematic than...

American Crusade Summary Religious Freedom Used Against LGBTQ+ Rights, Anti-Discrimination Laws, and Minority Religions

Seidel argues that the Crusaders have been successful at weaponizing religious freedom as a tool to evade anti-discrimination laws and impose their bigotry on others, particularly on the LGBTQ community and members of minority faiths. Those who support the Crusaders’ aim may claim that this use of religious liberty to discriminate is limited only to same-sex marriage rights. They argue, for instance, that a cake maker refusing to create a dessert for a same-sex marriage has nothing to do with denying services to a protected class in violation of state law, but rather is about the rights of that bakery owner to exercise their sincerely held religious beliefs.

Seidel argues these claims are not just disingenuous but also deeply dangerous, as this argument can easily be extended to evade a host of civil rights protections in other areas. Once religious exemptions from laws that protect civil rights are granted, there is no clear way to cabin that bigotry to a particular group or a particular right.

Discriminating Against LGBTQ+ by Denying Service

Seidel offers two key examples where the courts wrongly permitted discrimination against LGBTQ citizens in the name of religious...

American Crusade Summary Strategies to Promote Christian Nationalism Under the Banner of "Religious Freedom"

Seidel argues that the Crusaders have adopted several strategies to achieve their ultimate goal of Christian nationalist policy by masking it as a push for religious liberty. Their strategies include dismantling public schools in support of a parallel, Christian private education system; creating a narrative of Christian victimhood and persecution; and weaponizing their take on religious liberty to undermine and eventually overturn laws that hinder a Christian right-wing agenda.

To accomplish this, the Crusaders have also focused significant effort on controlling the judicial branch. Packing the courts ensures that they will win their cases regardless of the facts or the law.

Dismantling Public Schools to Build a Separate School System for White Christians

Seidel contends that the modern education reform movement, with its focus on “choice” in education and programs that use vouchers, is a disguised attempt to erode public education and establish a parallel school system, one that's segregated and privileges White Christian students, much like the push for private segregationist schools that followed Brown v. Board. By deliberately defunding public schools while channeling...