Christian right

Demonstrators at the 2004 March for Life in Washington D.C.

The Christian Right has engaged in battles over abortion, euthanasia, contraception, pornography, gambling, obscenity, state sanctioned prayer in public schools, textbook contents (concerning creationism), homosexuality, and sexual education. The Supreme Court's decision to make abortion a constitutionally protected right in the 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling was the driving force behind the rise of the Christian Right in the 1970s.[28] Changing political context led to the Christian Right's advocacy for other issues, such as opposition to euthanasia and campaigning for abstinence-only sex education.[28]

Ralph Reed, the chairman of the Christian Coalition, stated that the 1988 presidential campaign of Pat Robertson was the 'political crucible' that led to the proliferation of Christian Right groups in the United States.[29]

Randall Balmer, on the other hand, has suggested that the New Christian Right Movement's rise was not centered around the issue of abortion, but rather Bob Jones University's refusal to comply with the Supreme Court's 1971 Green v. Connally ruling that permitted the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to collect penalty taxes from private religious schools that violated federal laws.[30]

Much of the Christian right's power within the American political system is attributed to their extraordinary turnout rate at the polls. The voters that coexist in the Christian right are also highly motivated and driven to get out a viewpoint on issues they care about. As well as high voter turnout, they can be counted on to attend political events, knock on doors and distribute literature. Members of the Christian right are willing to do the electoral work needed to see their candidate elected. Because of their high level of devotion, the Christian right does not need to monetarily compensate these people for their work.[8][31]

Led by Robert Grant advocacy group Christian Voice, Jerry Falwell's Moral Majority, Ed McAteer's Religious Roundtable Council, James Dobson's Focus on the Family, Paul Weyrich's Free Congress Foundation and The Heritage Foundation,[32] and Pat Robertson's Christian Broadcasting Network, the new Religious Right combined conservative politics with evangelical and fundamentalist teachings.[19] The birth of the New Christian right, however, is usually traced to a 1979 meeting where televangelist Jerry Falwell was urged to create a "Moral Majority" organization.[20][33] In 1979, Weyrich was in a discussion with Falwell when he remarked that there was a "moral majority" of Americans ready to be called to political action.[32] Weyrich later recalled in a 2007 interview with the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that after he mentioned the term "moral majority," Falwell "turned to his people and said, 'That's the name of our organization.' "[32]

Weyrich would then engineer a strong union between the Republican Party and many culturally conservative Christians.[32] Soon, Moral Majority became a general term for the conservative political activism of evangelists and fundamentalists such as Pat Robertson, James Robison, and Jerry Falwell.[27] Howard Schweber, Professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, writes that "in the past two decades", "Catholic politicians have emerged as leading figures in the religious conservative movement."[3]

One early attempt to bring the Christian right into American politics began in 1974 when Robert Grant, an early movement leader, founded American Christian Cause to advocate Christian ideological teachings in Southern California. Concerned that Christians overwhelmingly voted for President Jimmy Carter in 1976, Grant expanded his movement and founded Christian Voice to rally Christian voters behind socially conservative candidates. Prior to his alliance with Falwell, Weyrich sought an alliance with Grant.[34] Grant and other Christian Voice staff soon set up their main office at the headquarters of Weyrich's Heritage Foundation.[34] However, the alliance between Weyrich and Grant fell apart in 1978.[34]

In the late 1980s, Pat Robertson founded the Christian Coalition of America, building from his 1988 presidential run, with Republican activist Ralph Reed, who became the spokesman for the Coalition. In 1992, the national Christian Coalition, Inc., headquartered in Virginia Beach, Virginia, began producing voter guides, which it distributed to conservative Christian churches, both Protestant and Catholic, with the blessing of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of New York.[35] Under the leadership of Reed and Robertson, the Coalition quickly became the most prominent voice in the conservative Christian movement, its influence culminating with an effort to support the election of a conservative Christian to the presidency in 1996. In addition, they have encouraged the convergence of conservative Christian ideology with political issues, such as healthcare, the economy, education and crime.[36]

Focus on the Family's Visitor's Welcome Center in Colorado Springs, Colorado

Political activists lobbied within the Republican party locally and nationally to influence party platforms and nominations.[37] More recently James Dobson's group Focus on the Family, based in Colorado Springs, and the Family Research Council in Washington D.C. have gained enormous respect from Republican lawmakers. While strongly advocating for these ideological matters, Dobson himself is more wary of the political spectrum and much of the resources of his group are devoted to other aims such as media.[38] However, as a private citizen, Dobson has stated his opinion on presidential elections; on February 5, 2008, Dobson issued a statement regarding the 2008 presidential election and his strong disappointment with the Republican party's candidates.[39]

In an essay written in 1996, Ralph Reed argued against the moral absolutist tone of Christian right leaders, arguing for the Republican Party Platform to stress the moral dimension of abortion rather than placing emphasis on overturning Roe v. Wade. Reed believes that pragmatism is the best way to advocate for the Christian right.[40]

Overtly partisan actions by churches could threaten their 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status due to the Johnson Amendment of the Internal Revenue Code.[41] In one notable example, the former pastor of the East Waynesville Baptist Church in Waynesville, North Carolina "told the congregation that anyone who planned to vote for Democratic Sen. John Kerry should either leave the church or repent".[42] The church later expelled nine members who had voted for Kerry and refused to repent, which led to criticism on the national level. The pastor resigned and the ousted church members were allowed to return.[43]

The Alliance Defense Fund started the Pulpit Freedom Initiative[44] in 2008. ADF states that "[t]he goal of Pulpit Freedom Sunday is simple: have the Johnson Amendment declared unconstitutional – and once and for all remove the ability of the IRS to censor what a pastor says from the pulpit."[45]

Both Christian right and secular polling organizations sometimes conduct polls to determine which presidential candidates will receive the support of Christian right constituents. One such poll is taken at the Family Research Council's Values Voter Summit.[46][47] George W. Bush's electoral success owed much to his overwhelming support from white evangelical voters, who comprise 23% of the vote. In 2000 he received 68% of the white evangelical vote; in 2004 that percentage rose to 78%.[48] In 2016, Donald Trump received 81% of the white evangelical vote.[49][50]

Jerry Falwell Jr. and Donald Trump at Liberty University.

The Home School Legal Defense Association was co-founded in 1983 by Michael Farris, who would later establish Patrick Henry College, and Michael Smith. This organization attempts to challenge laws that serve as obstacles to allowing parents to home-school their children and to organize the disparate group of homeschooling families into a cohesive bloc. The number of homeschooling families has increased in the last twenty years, and around 80 percent of these families identify themselves as evangelicals.[51]

The main universities associated with the Christian right in the United States are:

• Bob Jones University – Protestant Fundamentalist institution, founded in 1927.[52]
• Christendom College – Roman Catholic institution, founded in 1977[53]
• Liberty University – Baptist institution, founded in 1971[54]
• Regent University – Evangelical Christian institution, founded in 1977[54]

The media has played a major role in the rise of the Christian right since the 1920s and has continued to be a powerful force for political Christianity today. The role of the media for the Religious right has been influential in its ability to connect Christian audiences to the larger American culture while at the same time bringing and keeping religion into play as both a political and a cultural force.[55] The political agenda of the Christian right has been disseminated to the public through a variety of media outlets including radio broadcasting, television, and literature.

Religious broadcasting began in the 1920s through the radio.[55] Between the 1950s and 1980s, TV became a powerful way for the Christian right to influence the public through shows such as Pat Robertson's The 700 Club and The Family Channel. The Internet has also helped the Christian right reach a much larger audience. Organization's websites play a strong role in popularising the Christian right's stances on cultural and political issues, and informed interested viewers on how to get involved. The Christian Coalition, for example, has used the Internet to inform the public, as well as to sell merchandise and gather members.[56]

The Christian right strongly advocates for a system of educational choice, using a system of school vouchers, instead of public education. Vouchers would be government funded and could be redeemed for "a specified maximum sum per child per years if spent on approved educational services".[57] This method would allow parents to determine which school their child attends while relieving the economic burden associated with private schools. The concept is popular among constituents of church-related schools, including those affiliated with Roman Catholicism.

The Protestant members of the Christian right in the United States generally promotes the teaching of creationism and intelligent design as opposed to, or alongside, biological evolution.[58][59][60][61] Some supporters of the Christian right have opposed the teaching of evolution in the past, but they did not have the ability to stop it being taught in public schools as was done during the Scopes Trial in Dayton, Tennessee, in which a science teacher went on trial for teaching about the subject of evolution in a public school.[62] Other "Christian right organizations supported the teaching of creationism, along with evolution, in public schools", specifically promoting theistic evolution (also known as evolutionary creationism) in which God is regarded as the originator of the process.[58][59]

Members of and organizations associated with the Christian right, such as the Discovery Institute, created and popularized the modern concept of intelligent design, which became widely known only with the publication of the book Of Pandas and People in 1989.[63] The Discovery Institute, through their intelligent design initiative called the Center for Science and Culture, has endorsed the teach the controversy approach. According to its proponents, such an approach would ensure that both the strengths and weaknesses of evolutionary theory were discussed in the curriculum.[64] This tactic was criticized by Judge John E. Jones III in Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, describing it as "at best disingenuous, and at worst a canard."[65] The overwhelming majority of scientific research, both in the United States and elsewhere, has concluded that the theory of evolution, using the technical definition of the word theory, is the only viable explanation of the development of life, and an overwhelming majority of biologists strongly support its presentation in public school science classes.[66] Outside the United States, as well as among American Catholics and Mainline Protestants, Christian conservatives have generally come to accept the theory of evolution.[67][68][69][70][71]

Some Christian groups advocate for the removal of sex education literature from public schools,[72] for parental opt-out of comprehensive sex education, or for abstinence-only sex education. Thirty percent of America's sexual-education programs are abstinence based.[73] These programs promote abstinence until marriage as the only way to prevent pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases and emotional issues that could arise from sexual activity.[74] There is no evidence supporting the effectiveness of abstinence-only sex education; multiple studies have failed to find any benefit, and have even found that it may be harmful.[75][76] It has been found to be ineffective in decreasing HIV risk in the developed world.[77] Likewise, it does not decrease rates of sexual activity or unplanned pregnancy when compared to comprehensive sex education.[75]

The Christian right promotes homeschooling and private schooling as a valid alternative to public education for parents who object to the content being taught at school. In recent years, the percentage of children being homeschooled has risen from 1.7% of the student population in 1999 to 2.2% in 2003.[78] Much of this increase has been attributed to the desire to incorporate Christian teachings into the curriculum.[79] In 2003, 72% of parents who homeschooled their children cited the ability to provide religious or moral instruction as the reason for removing their children from public schools.[80] The Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District case established that creationism cannot be taught in public schools, and in response officials have increasingly appropriated public funds for charter schools that teach curricula like Accelerated Christian Education.[81]

Supporters of the Christian right have no one unified stance on the role of government since the movement is primarily one that advocates social conservatism; in fact, "struggles [have] broken out in state party organizations" between supporters of the Christian right and other conservatives.[82][83] It promotes conservative interpretations of the Bible as the basis for moral values and enforcing such values by legislation. Some members of the Christian right, especially Catholics, accept the Catholic Church's strong support for labor unions.

The Christian right believes that separation of church and state is not explicit in the American Constitution, believing instead that such separation is a creation of what it claims are activist judges in the judicial system.[84][85][86] In the United States, the Christian right often supports their claims by asserting that the country was "founded by Christians as a Christian Nation."[87][88] Members of the Christian right take the position that the Establishment Clause bars the federal government from establishing or sponsoring a state church (e.g., the Church of England), but does not prevent the government from acknowledging religion. The Christian right points out that the term "separation of church and state" is derived from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson, not from the Constitution itself.[89][90][91] Furthermore, Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) takes the view that the concept of "separation of church and state" has been used by the American Civil Liberties Union and its allies to inhibit public acknowledgment of Christianity and restrict the religious freedoms of Christians.[92]

Thus, Christian right leaders have argued that the Establishment Clause does not prohibit the display of religion in the public sphere. Leaders therefore believe that public institutions should be allowed, or even required, to display the Ten Commandments. This interpretation has been repeatedly rejected by the courts, which have found that such displays violate the Establishment Clause. Public officials though are prohibited from using their authority in which the primary effect is "advancing or prohibiting religion", according to the Lemon Supreme Court test, and there cannot be an "excessive entanglement with religion" and the government. Some, such as Bryan Fischer of the American Family Association, argue that the First Amendment, which specifically restricts Congress, applies only to the Congress and not the states. This position rejects the incorporation of the Bill of Rights.[93]

Generally, the Christian right supports the presence of religious institutions within government and the public sphere, and advocates for fewer restrictions on government funding for religious charities and schools. Both Catholics and Protestants, according to a 2005 Gallup study, have been supportive of school prayer in public schools.[59][94]

Early American fundamentalists, such as John R. Rice[95][96] often favored laissez-faire economics and were outspoken critics of the New Deal and later the Great Society.[95] The contemporary Christian right supports economic conservative policies such as tax cuts and social conservative policies such as child tax credits.[97][98]

Many evangelical Protestant supporters of the religious right have given very strong support to the state of Israel in recent decades, encouraging support for Israel in the United States government.[99] Some have linked Israel to Biblical prophesies; for example, Ed McAteer, founder of the Moral Majority, said "I believe that we are seeing prophecy unfold so rapidly and dramatically and wonderfully and, without exaggerating, makes me breathless."[100] This belief, an example of dispensationalism, arises from the idea that the establishment of Israel is a prerequisite for the Second Coming of Jesus, because it represents the Biblically prophesied Gathering of Israel. A 2017 poll indicates that this belief is held by 80% of evangelicals, and that half of evangelicals consider it an important cause of their support for the state of Israel.[101]

The Christian right opposes abortion, believing that life begins at conception and that abortion is murder. Therefore, those in the movement have worked toward the overturning of Roe v. Wade, and have also supported incremental steps to make abortion less available. Such efforts include bans on late-term abortion (including intact dilation and extraction),[102] prohibitions against Medicaid funding and other public funding for elective abortions, removal of taxpayer funding for Planned Parenthood and other organizations that provide abortion services, legislation requiring parental consent or notification for abortions performed on minors,[103] legal protections for unborn victims of violence, legal protections for infants born alive following failed abortions, and bans on abortifacient medications.

The Christian right element in the Reagan coalition strongly supported him in 1980, in the belief that he would appoint Supreme Court justices to overturn Roe V Wade. They were astonished and dismayed when his first appointment was Sandra Day O’Connor, whom they feared would tolerate abortion. They worked hard to defeat her confirmation but failed.[104]

The Christian right contends that morning-after pills such as Plan B and Ella are possible abortifacients, able to interfere with a fertilized egg's implantation in the uterine wall.[105] The labeling mandated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for Plan B and Ella state that they may interfere with implantation, but according to a June 2012, The New York Times article, many scientists believe that they work only by interfering with ovulation and are arguing to have the implantation language removed from product labels. The Christian right maintains that the chemical properties of morning-after pills make them abortifacients and that the politics of abortion is influencing scientific judgments. Jonathan Imbody of the Christian Medical Association says he questions "whether ideological considerations are driving these decisions."[105] Specifically, many Catholic members, as well as some conservative Protestant members, of the Christian right have campaigned against contraception altogether.[106][107]

According to some social science research, Christians and members of the Christian right are typically less concerned about issues of environmental responsibility than the general public.[108][109] Some have equated environmentalism to paganism.[108][109]

Due to the Christian right's views regarding ethics and to an extent due to negative views of eugenics common to most ideologies in North America, it has worked for the regulation and restriction of certain applications of biotechnology. In particular, the Christian right opposes therapeutic and reproductive human cloning, championing a 2005 United Nations ban on the practice,[110] and human embryonic stem cell research, which involves the extraction of one or more cells from a human embryo.[9] The Christian right supports research with adult stem cells, amniotic stem cells, and induced pluripotent stem cells which do not use cells from human embryos, as they view the harvesting of biological material from an embryo lacking the ability to give permission as an assault on a living being.

The Christian right also opposes euthanasia, and, in one highly publicized case, took an active role in seeking governmental intervention to prevent Terri Schiavo from being deprived of nutrition and hydration.

The modern roots of the Christian right's views on sexual matters were evident in the 1950s, a period in which many Christian conservatives in the United States viewed sexual promiscuity as not only excessive, but in fact as a threat to their ideal vision of the country.[10]^:30 Beginning in the 1970s, conservative Christian protests against promiscuity began to surface, largely as a reaction to the "permissive sixties" and an emerging prominence of sexual rights arising from Roe v Wade and the gay rights movement. The Christian right proceeded to make sexuality issues a priority political cause.[10]^:28

The Christian right champions itself as the "self-appointed conscience of American society". During the 1980s, the movement was largely dismissed by political pundits and mainstream religious leaders as "a collection of buffoonish has-beens". Later, it re-emerged, better organized and more focused, taking firm positions against abortion, pornography, sexual deviancy, and extreme feminism.[12][111]^:4 Beginning around the presidency of Donald Trump, Christian conservatives have largely refrained from engaging in debates about sexual morality.[112]

Influential Christian right organizations at the forefront of the anti-gay rights movement in the United States include Focus on the Family, Family Research Council and the Family Research Institute.[10]^:15–16 An important stratagem in Christian right anti-gay politics is in its rejection of "the edicts of a Big Brother" state, allowing it to profit from "a general feeling of discontent and demoralization with government". As a result, the Christian right has endorsed smaller government, restricting its ability to arbitrate in disputes regarding values and traditions. In this context, gay rights laws have come to symbolize the government's allegedly unconstitutional "[interference] with individual freedom".[10]^:170–171

The central tenets of Focus on the Family and similar organizations, such as the Family Research Council, emphasise issues such as abortion and the necessity of gender roles. A number of organizations, including the New Christian Right, "have in various ways rejected liberal America in favor of the regulation of pornography, anti-abortion legislation, the criminalization of homosexuality, and the virtues of faithfulness and loyalty in sexual partnerships", according to sociologist Bryan Turner.[11]

A large number of the Christian right view same-sex marriage as a central issue in the culture wars, more so than other gay rights issues and even more significantly than abortion.[111]^:57 The legalization of same-sex marriage in Massachusetts in 2004 changed the Christian right, causing it to put its opposition to these marriages above most other issues. It also created previously unknown interracial and ecumenical coalitions, and stimulated new electoral activity in pastors and congregations.[111]^:58

One argument which questions the legitimacy of the Christian right posits that Jesus Christ may be considered a leftist on the modern political spectrum. Jesus' concern with the poor and feeding the hungry, among other things, are argued, by proponents of Christian leftism, to be core attributes of modern-day socialism and social justice.[116][117][118] However, others contend that while Jesus' concern for the poor and hungry is virtuous and that individuals have a moral obligation to help others, the relationship between charity and the state should not be construed in the same manner.[119][120]

Some criticize what they see as a politicization of Christianity because they say Jesus transcends political concepts.[121][122]

Mikhail Gorbachev referred to Jesus as "the first Socialist".[123][124]

The Christian right has tried to recruit social conservatives in the black church.[125] Prior to the 2016 United States presidential election, African-American Republican Ben Carson emerged as a leader in the Christian right.[126] Other Christian African-Americans who identify with conservatism are Supreme Court justice Clarence Thomas,[127] rapper Kanye West,[128] and pastor Tony Evans.[129][130]

Whilst the Christian right in the United States is making a tough stand against the progression of LGBT rights, other Christian movements have taken a more lenient approach towards the matter, arguing that the biblical texts only oppose specific types of divergent sexual behaviour, such as paederasty (i.e. the sodomising of young boys by older men).[131][132][133][134] During the Trump administration, there is a growing push for "religious liberty bills" that would allow individuals and businesses claiming anti-LGBT beliefs that are religious in origin to exempt themselves from obeying anti-discrimination laws intended to protect LGBT people.

Some social scientists have used the word "dominionism" to refer to adherence to Dominion Theology[135][136][137] as well as to the influence in the broader Christian Right of ideas inspired by Dominion Theology.[135] Although such influence (particularly of Reconstructionism) has been described by many authors,[20][138] full adherents to Reconstructionism are few and marginalized among conservative Christians.[20][139][140] In the early 1990s, sociologist Sara Diamond[141][142] defined dominionism in her PhD dissertation as a movement that, while including Dominion Theology and Reconstructionism as subsets, is much broader in scope, extending to much of the Christian Right.[143] She was followed by journalists including Frederick Clarkson[144][145] and Chris Hedges[146][147][148] and others who have stressed the influence of Dominionist ideas on the Christian right.[149][150][151][152][153][154][155][156][157][158]

The terms "dominionist" and "dominionism" are rarely used for self-description, and their usage has been attacked from several quarters. Journalist Anthony Williams charged that its purpose is "to smear the Republican Party as the party of domestic Theocracy, facts be damned."[159] Stanley Kurtz labeled it "conspiratorial nonsense," "political paranoia," and "guilt by association",[160] and decried Hedges' "vague characterizations" that allow him to "paint a highly questionable picture of a virtually faceless and nameless 'Dominionist' Christian mass."[161] Kurtz also complained about a perceived link between average Christian evangelicals and extremism such as Christian Reconstructionism:

The notion that conservative Christians want to reinstitute slavery and rule by genocide is not just crazy, it's downright dangerous. The most disturbing part of the Harper's cover story (the one by Chris Hedges) was the attempt to link Christian conservatives with Hitler and fascism. Once we acknowledge the similarity between conservative Christians and fascists, Hedges appears to suggest, we can confront Christian evil by setting aside 'the old polite rules of democracy.' So wild conspiracy theories and visions of genocide are really excuses for the Left to disregard the rules of democracy and defeat conservative Christians – by any means necessary.[160]

Lisa Miller of Newsweek said that many warnings about "dominionism" are "paranoid" and that "the word creates a siege mentality in which 'we' need to guard against 'them.'"[162] Ross Douthat of The New York Times noted that "many of the people that writers like Diamond and others describe as 'dominionists' would disavow the label, many definitions of dominionism conflate several very different Christian political theologies, and there's a lively debate about whether the term is even useful at all."[163] According to Joe Carter of First Things, "the term was coined in the 1980s by Diamond and is never used outside liberal blogs and websites. No reputable scholars use the term for it is a meaningless neologism that Diamond concocted for her dissertation,"[164] while Jeremy Pierce of First Things coined the word "dominionismist" to describe those who promote the idea that there is a dominionist conspiracy.[165]

Other criticism has focused on the proper use of the term. Berlet wrote that "some critics of the Christian Right have stretched the term dominionism past its breaking point,"[166] and argued that, rather than labeling conservatives as extremists, it would be better to "talk to these people" and "engage them."[167] Sara Diamond wrote that "[l]iberals' writing about the Christian Right's take-over plans has generally taken the form of conspiracy theory", and argued that instead one should "analyze the subtle ways" that ideas like Dominionism "take hold within movements and why."[168]

Dan Olinger, a professor at the fundamentalist Bob Jones University in Greenville, South Carolina, said, "We want to be good citizens and participants, but we're not really interested in using the iron fist of the law to compel people to everything Christians should do."[169] Bob Marcaurelle, interim pastor at Mountain Springs Baptist Church in Piedmont, said the Middle Ages were proof enough that Christian ruling groups are almost always corrupted by power. "When Christianity becomes the government, the question is whose Christianity?" Marcaurelle asked.[170][171]

Religion has been a key factor in Canadian politics since well before Canadian Confederation in 1867, when the Conservatives were the party of traditionalist Catholics and Anglicans and the Liberals were the party of Protestant dissenters and anti-clerical Catholics. This pattern largely remained until the mid-twentieth century when a new division emerged between the Christian left (represented by the Social Gospel philosophy and ecumenicism) and the Christian right (represented by fundamentalism and biblical literalism). The Christian left (along with the secular and anti-religious left) became supporters of the New Democratic Party while the right moved to the Social Credit Party, especially in Western Canada, and to a lesser extent the Progressive Conservatives.

The Social Credit Party, founded in 1935 represented a major change in Canadian religious politics. Until that time, fundamentalists had shunned politics as "worldly", and a distraction from the proper practice of religion. However, the new party was founded by fundamentalist radio preacher and Bible school teacher William Aberhart or "Bible Bill". Aberhart mixed his own interpretation of scripture and prophecy with the monetary reform theories of social credit to create a movement that swept across Alberta, winning the provincial election of 1935 in a landslide. Aberhart and his disciple Ernest Manning then governed the province for the next forty years, several times trying to expand into the rest of Canada. In 1987 Manning's son, Preston Manning, founded the new Reform Party of Canada, which soon became the main party of the religious right. It won majorities of the seats in Western Canada in repeated elections, but was unable to break through in Eastern Canada, though it became the official opposition from 1997 to 2003 (Reform was renamed the Canadian Alliance in 2000). In 2003 the Canadian Alliance and the Progressive Conservatives merged to create the Conservative Party of Canada, led by Stephen Harper, a member of the Christian and Missionary Alliance, who went on to become prime minister in 2006.

Canada has had a Charter of Rights and Freedoms since the Canadian Constitution was patriated in 1982. As a result, there have been major changes in the law's application to issues that bear on individual and minority group rights. Abortions were completely decriminalized after two R. v. Morgentaler cases (in 1988 and in 1993). A series of provincial superior court decisions allowing same-sex marriage led the federal government to introduce legislation that introduced same-sex marriage in all of Canada. Former Conservative prime minister Stephen Harper stated before taking office that he would hold a free vote on the issue,[175] but declared the issue closed after a vote in the House of Commons in 2006.[176]

Christian right politics in Latin America is strongly connected with the growing Evangelical Christian community.[177][178] Catholics in Latin America, despite being normally socially conservative, tend to be more left-wing in economics[179][180] due to the traditional teachings of the Catholic social doctrine.[178] Evangelical Christians, on the other hand, are mostly from the neo-Pentecostal movement, and thus believers in the Prosperity Theology that justifies most of their neoliberal economic ideas.[178] They are also strongly socially conservative, even for Latin American standards.[178]

In the Netherlands Calvinist Protestants have long had their own political parties, now called the Reformed Political Party (SGP) on the right, and the ChristianUnion (CU) in the center. For generations they operated their own newspapers and broadcasting association. The SGP has about 28,000 members, and three members of parliament, of the 150. It has always been in opposition to the government.[181] The SGP has helped the Dutch government to get laws through the Second Chamber 2010–2012. In exchange that government did not increase the number of Sundays on which shopping is allowed.

In Northern Ireland, Ian Paisley led a Protestant fundamentalist party, the Democratic Unionist Party, which had a considerable influence on the province's culture.[182][183] Since the 2017 United Kingdom general election, the DUP has provided confidence and supply to the governing Conservative Party, although this agreement provoked concern from socially liberal elements of the party about possible DUP influence on social policy.[184] Although there is no evidence this occurred. Karen Armstrong has mentioned British evangelical leader Colin Urquhart as advocating positions similar to the Christian Right.[185] Some members of the Conservative Party and the Brexit Party including Ann Widdecombe, Jacob Rees-Mogg, Nadine Dorries, Matthew Offord and Peter Bone also support some of the values of the Christian right.

In Australia, fundamentalist Christianity is the base for Fred Nile and his Christian Democratic Party as well as the Family First Party. Nile in 1967–68 was Assistant Director of the Billy Graham Crusade in Sydney. Both parties promote social conservatism, opposing gay rights and abortion.[186] Some party members of the Liberal and National Party Coalition and the Australian Labor Party also support some of the values of the Christian right on abortion and gay rights. The Australian Christian Lobby argues for opposition to same-sex marriage in state and federal politics.[187]

In the Philippines, due to Spanish colonization, and the introduction of the Catholic Church, religious conservatism has a strong influence on national policies. Some have argued that the U.S. Christian right may have roots in the Philippines.[188]

The Swiss Federal Democratic Union is a small conservative Protestant party with about 1% of the vote.[189]

In Scandinavia, the Centre Party is a bible-oriented fundamentalist party; it has about 4% of the votes in the Faroe Islands. However, the Norwegian Christian People's Party, the Swedish Christian Democrats and Danish Christian Democrats are less religiously orthodox and are similar to mainstream European Christian Democracy.

In Fiji, Sodelpa is a conservative, nationalist party which seeks to make Christianity the state religion, while the constitution makes Fiji a secular republic. Following the 2014 general election, Sodelpa is the main opposition party in Parliament.

In Brazil, the evangelical caucus have a great influence at the parliament and in the society in general. The bloc promotes strong socially conservative positions, like opposition to abortion, LGBT rights, marijuana legalization, sexual and gender education at schools and support to decrease of age of defense of infancy. Except for left-wing and far-left parties with strong social progressive beliefs like Workers' Party or Socialism and Liberty Party, Christian conservatives can be found in all political parties of Brazil, but nevertheless they are more common associated with parties like Social Democratic Party, Democratas, PSL, Social Christian Party, Brazilian Republican Party, Patriota and in the Party of the Republic. In 2016, Marcelo Crivella, a licensed pentecostal pastor from the Universal Church of the Kingdom of God, won in a runoff the election to mayor of Rio de Janeiro, the second biggest city in Brazil, with the Brazilian Republican Party, making for the first time an evangelical bloc member mayor of a big city in Brazil. In 2018, Jair Bolsonaro was elected president with massive support of conservative Catholics, Charismatics, Evangelicals and Pentecostals; Another candidate, Cabo Daciolo, from Patriota, attracted much attention from media and public in general, despite a lower votation. Both had a right-wing populist, Christian Nationalist program, but Bolsonaro was near to a national conservative and economic liberal one, contrasting with a Ultranationalist, theocratic and protectionist style of Daciolo.

In Poland, the Roman Catholic national-conseravtive party Law and Justice can be considered to be a party of the Christian right.[190]

In Hungary, the ruling national-conservative party Fidesz can also be considered to be a party of the Christian right. Viktor Orbán is known for his use of conservative Christian values against immigration and the rise of Islam in Europe.[191][192]

The Christian right has a strong position in several Conservative parties worldwide, although many members of these parties would also, paradoxically, strongly oppose such views.