Understanding the Divide: Vertical Morality and MAGA Christianity

The concept of vertical morality sheds light on the complex relationship between certain Christian teachings and the political ideologies embraced by some supporters of former President Donald Trump. This ethical framework posits that moral behavior is dictated by an external authority, often perceived as God, which can lead to significant contradictions between the teachings of love and mercy found in Christianity and the harsh political policies advocated by some within the MAGA movement.

Many Americans struggle to reconcile the teachings of Jesus, who emphasized compassion, with policies that appear to punish vulnerable groups, such as immigrants and LGBTQ individuals. According to Malynda Hale, executive director of The New Evangelicals, this disparity illustrates how vertical morality operates within the framework of conservative Christianity. She explains that under this system, ethical behavior is often assessed not by kindness to others but by adherence to a set of rules established by a higher authority.

Ajoy, a voice in the discourse on morality, highlights the contrast between vertical and horizontal morality. The latter prioritizes the well-being of individuals and communities, advocating for actions that minimize harm. In contrast, vertical morality can lead individuals to support policies that align with a perceived divine directive, regardless of their impact on others. This distinction underscores the complexity of moral decision-making in contemporary society.

Vertical morality is often rooted in what some call divine command theory, where morality is viewed as coming from a higher power. This perspective is prevalent in conservative Christian circles, where followers believe that true goodness can only be achieved through obedience to God’s commands. However, this interpretation can sometimes lead to a lack of empathy for those deemed as transgressors against divine law.

Critics argue that this framework has contributed to a political climate where compassion is often overshadowed by a rigid adherence to rules. As Ajoy notes, “Evangelicals are taught that all morality comes from God, and therefore true goodness can only be spread by obeying God, even if it harms people around us.” The issue arises when this moral view is weaponized for political gain, as seen in the rise of Christian nationalism during the Trump administration.

The reliance on vertical morality has resulted in a binary worldview among some conservative Christians, where supporters of their political ideology are perceived as aligned with God, while dissenters are labeled as evil. This perspective, as noted by Levings, reflects a shift away from the teachings of Jesus and a move towards a more authoritarian interpretation of scripture, often emphasizing Old Testament laws over the New Testament’s message of love and grace.

The implications of vertical morality extend beyond theological discussions into the realm of public policy. For instance, the harsh treatment of immigrants can be justified through this lens, as individuals are viewed as deserving punishment for breaking rules, regardless of the context. This perspective leads to a desensitization toward the suffering of others, fostering a culture where compassion is sidelined in favor of strict adherence to perceived divine laws.

This moral absolutism appeals to many during times of social upheaval, providing a sense of certainty and direction. As Klinger Cain notes, “It’s comforting to always know what the answer is and where to find it.” However, this reliance on a singular moral authority can stifle critical thinking and empathy, complicating the pursuit of social justice and collective responsibility.

Experts argue that the dangers of vertical morality lie in its potential to create a society that prioritizes personal righteousness over community welfare. Hale warns that this focus can blind individuals to injustices and may lead to harmful behaviors being justified in the name of faith. “When your focus is on individual righteousness rather than collective responsibility, you risk fostering a culture where people aren’t held accountable for harmful actions,” she states.

The ramifications of this moral framework are evident in contemporary political discourse, where individuals may feel justified in supporting policies that contradict the core teachings of compassion and love espoused by Jesus. As Ajoy states, “We’re seeing vertical morality weaponized today in the Trump administration.” This trend raises critical questions about the intersection of faith and politics and the ethical implications of aligning religious beliefs with partisan agendas.

In summary, understanding vertical morality is crucial for navigating the current political landscape within conservative Christianity. This ethical framework, while providing a clear moral compass to some, can lead to significant challenges in fostering empathy and compassion for others. As society grapples with complex social issues, the need for a balanced approach that integrates both vertical and horizontal moral perspectives becomes increasingly important. The call for a more inclusive and compassionate interpretation of faith is essential in addressing the contradictions inherent in the current political climate.