other television providers, getting you a front row seat to democracy. >> here is what is ahead on this christmas day edition of "washington journal." it is our special holiday week author series featuring live segments each morning with a new writer. today's guest is frank buckley. we will discuss his book "progressive conservatism." we welcome your perspective. call in or share your views via texts my tweets, or facebook comments. "washington journal" starts now. >> [video clip] >> i sincerely hope this holiday season will drain the poison that is infecting our politics that set us against one another. i hope this christmas season marks a first start for our nation because there is so much that unites us as americans. so much more that unites us than divides us. ♪

host: good morning. welcome to "washington journal." and merry christmas to all who celebrate. and of course, for the, second largest religious affiliation in america it is the seventh day of hanukkah, which brings us to our discussion this morning, the role of religion and politics, how it affects your political views, and whether you believe there should be more or less religion. our question, does religion unite or divide? republicans, we want you to call us at (202) 748-8001. democrats, give us a call at (202) 748-8000. independents, call us at (202) 748-8002. you can also text us at (202) 748-8003.

find us on facebook.com/c-span, on twitter, and on instagram. you can start calling in now, and we will get to some of those calls in just a moment. but first, let's talk to clifford young. he is the u.s. public affairs president. good morning. guest: it is good to be here. host: thank you so much for getting up with us on this christmas morning. you recently had some polling on this topic of religion and politics. can you tell us, how do americans feel about the role of spirituality and religion? guest: that is great. what we brought you today is a compilation of a couple polls. we wanted to get out the issue of religion and division, right?

the holiday season is obviously a time where we come together with family and friends. we sit at the dinner table and we discuss and talk. as of lately, right, that has been difficult, having a discussion about politics. it doesn't matter how you asked the question. it doesn't matter the poll. political divisiveness is one of the concerns in america today and our polls so specifically for 9% of americans are worried about that, the divisiveness, polarization, those sorts of issues are key today, kind of tearing america apart. we wanted to ask a fundamental question, can there be something we can do about it as americans? and what do we find? what do we find? this broad stroke, we can ripped from there. on one hand, americans believe

there is common ground. two thirds believe it is overemphasized by the media and politicians, that is the division, that americans have a lot more in common than they don't. it is a question of how you operationalize it, how you interact with other people, right? the question is, ok, fine, but how? at the highest level, our poll shows that americans understand other americans are fundamentally good, that if given the chance, they will do the right thing, and that they will improve things and that they will improve things. they will improve their environment, their relationships with other people. about two thirds of americans think that. two thirds of americans also think that politicians have to do their obligation in tamping down the rhetoric, right? tamping down the divisiveness. that is what we were hearing from president biden. it is poisonous.

high level, a lot of faith in other americans. they think the political class needs to be more responsible. lastly, what is the role of religion on this? i would say in two broad brush strokes, there are two sides of the same coin, a kind of double-edged sword here. on the one hand, americans really see the role of religion and spirituality and bringing people together in being the better self when engaging the other with people that are different than you. that is important. but on the other hand, they are skeptical. there is a degree of skepticism about how it is deployed in politics, right? they are also unsure about how effective it really is relative to other solutions like bringing more voice to people. we can go to more detail obviously when we look at the specifics of the poll.

host: as you mentioned, the poll is really wide reaching, but one thing i want to bring up is it said 68% of respondents said that -- sorry, 66% said that politicians should put aside their differences and compromise. you mentioned that briefly. that is the second line in this chart i am showing. 56% said they agreed more with the fact that politicians should set aside their differences and compromise. the remaining 34% said they agreed with the statement politicians should fight for what is right without compromise. can you break that down a little bit? you have two thirds saying politicians should do more compromising. only a third of people feel like your views should be -- you should be so set in your views that you were unwilling to compromised. guest: yeah.

i think that says it all today, right? once again, independent of the polls, we looked at the data and there is a lot of common ground in america. americans have a lot in common even though they are different, right? but it is always that minority, whether the right or left, that drives things. that is a more partisan part of us. as we are seeing in this poll. a vast majority of americans come at least two thirds, can see the better have, the better selves, the better angel of our nature. there is always that strong minority that says it is not about compromise, it is about doing it our way and pushing that forward independent of the cause. host: also on the poll when you asked about being friends with someone who does not share your same political views, 55% of

respondents said it is not that difficult. 75% of people said they can learn by talking to people with different political views. so why so many people say that but it does not appear that it is often actually done? guest: yeah. that is the difference between theory and practice, right? in theory, we can all agree it is better to interact and be empathetic. but in practice, let's be serious, a lot of america today especially segregated. we live and our bubbles that are very distinct. there are blue bubbles, red bubbles, ethnic bubbles, racial bubbles. that inhibits our interaction, our ability to understand the other. a lot of our polling we have done over the recent past shows that very distinctly. a lot of the basic social science of research shows that -- science research sewers that as well -- a lot of the basic

social science research shows that as well. host: when talking about whether religion should be part of politics, that was not kind what was pulled as the most effective in making spiritual values and religion bigger. they said that was less effective in reducing divisiveness as other ways. can you talk about what did respondents say would be better solutions to reducing divisiveness in politics? guest: that is a great question. on the one hand, as i was saying, a majority of americans see spirituality and religion as having an important role in bringing us together. it varies a little bit depending on how we ask the question, but overall, a majority of americans think that. but how effective is it really? when we rank order it, that is putting religion against other solutions, it ranks lower.

the number one way to come together, to incentivize consensus and union is actually bringing more voice to people. how do you interpret that? probably at the election box, making sure people's voices are heard. and other ways as well. that overall whether you are on the right or left, your voice is heard. that the number one most effective way of bringing people together. the second is just interacting with others that don't share your values. that is seen as extremely important. how are we going to do that? in simple sense, in schools for example. four at religious houses, churches, synagogues, and mosques you can do that perhaps. those are the top two ways to bring people together at least from the perspective of americans. that is bringing more voice to people and greater interaction.

only a plurality, 47% depending on how you asked the question, believe religion or spiritual values are the same. it is not that it is the solution but not the top of my solution, the number one or two solution in americans' minds. host: i want to shift for the last few minutes of our conversation. there was a different kind of poll, similar that you guys published on the real meaning of christmas. and they were fun questions as well. so i want to start. it looks at how people look at the real meaning of christmas is being forgotten. 42% of respondents said they strongly agreed that most americans have forgotten the real meaning of christmas. 33% said someone agreed. 10% said somewhat disagree. 6% strongly agreed.

again, the real meaning of christmas, there were a lot of americans who feel it is lost. what do you make of that? guest: i think that goes with the times. there is a degree of cynicism and skepticism about where we are as a nation and society. and not in our everyday lives. the question is, what do people mean by that, the real meaning of christmas? the meaning can vary a bit. it can be as concrete as the day that jesus was born, very religious important day especially for christmas but all monotheistic religions. or it can mean something a bit broader, more conceptual, more existential. think about others before you think about yourself. whatever the specific meaning for people is, there is the sense that we are not there unified as a people. and that is how i would read it. host: and that was on that

chart. 6% were strongly disagreeing about americans forgetting about the meaning of christmas. also asked about taking down holiday decorations. 41% said they take down decorations the first weekendf january. 48% said the latest people should leave their holiday decorations is the first week of january. 23% said people should take do their christmas decorations by late july. i will ask you, have your decorations up, when do you and your family normally take him down? guest: i will tell you one thing, my neighbor never does. so there you go, year-round. but in our household, we take them down the first of january. host: this is the latest. i want to end on this one. the most annoying or overplayed christmas song. that was also part of the poll. so it first asked people if they felt that there were certain

songs that were overplayed and of those who voted can come up with a song, mariah carey' "all i want for christmas is you," 12% tt is the most annoying or overplayed song. 6% "jingle bells." 5%, "grandma got made over by a reindeer." and 4%, all christmas songs. i thought that was a fun polling question you guys had. what other things did you learn about the traditions of christmas that were interesting? guest: overall, obviously we have these ingrained behaviors where we come together every year and interact with family and friends. that is perhaps the most important thing. we asked another question on santa claus. we just want to know how many adults still believe in santa claus. 21% of adults said they still

believe in santa claus. i don't know if that is specifically santa claus, the physical figure, or the spirit of christmas and the spirit of santa claus. but that is a big chunk of adults that i think were waiting up last night for their presents. host: even the christmas spirit lives on in adults. thank you so much. clifford young, we appreciate you joining us this morning. guest: thank you so much. host: and enjoy the rest of your morning. now we want to get to your calls. our question this morning is, does religion unite or divide? republicans, call us at (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. we want to get to your calls right now. our first caller, robert on the republican line in phoenix. good morning, robert. caller: good morning. good morning.

to answer your question, i believe religion can divide if we let it. it is up to us as individuals and americans to understand. something the gentleman said earlier, we have more in common that unites us than divide us. it can divide us if we so choose to let that happen. let us what i have come to learn being an american in this country for 58 years. it is a pleasure to live in this nation and a pleasure to grow and learn from people who are different from myself, how i look and everything. if we just close our eyes and talk to one another, we should find we are all the same except

for when we want to be divided and hold steadfast to for lack of a better term of the brainwashing that is besieged upon us. not to belittle the media, but the sensationalism that can come from the media. i just think that religion is very true to make us stronger, make us more humble. that is just my humble opinion. host: let's go now to bernard in dallas on the democratic line. what are your thoughts this morning, bernard? caller: good morning. merry christmas. religious people are the most dangerous people on the planet. in this country, evangelicals are the ones that pretty much take the precedents.

they are almost like a cult, according to how big they are. christianity is the biggest religion we have in this country, and they rule. thank you. host: alright. let's talk now with tyrone in new york city on the democratic line. caller: thank you for taking my call, and happy holidays. yes, religion divides is because if you are not the same religion that i am, i had a bad habit of degrading you because you are not the same religion that i am. but religion had a time back in the days when they first started writing about it and putting it into text. if we don't change with the times, we will continue repeating our mistakes over and over again. i think we need to move forward

from this religion, and they are trying to put more insight our politics. it should not be there. it should be separate from politics. i truly believe that it creates more of a problem. thank you. host: let's go to the independent line now. nick is in canton, michigan. caller: hi. you and the listeners think about not teaching religion, incorporating religion into minors and children, any baptism or shehadah or the religious rituals will remake someone a muslim, christian, or hindu. the age of 21 or so. if you did that, this divisiveness will decrease significantly. i want to watch you and the

others, what you think about my proposal. thank you. host: our next caller is jason in spokane, washington, on the democratic line. you are on, jason. caller: hey, everybody. first i want to say i am an american before i am a democrat. and i also got to say that as a young man, i have lived a torn life. i grew up in a religious children's home. it was quite a terror in the fabric of my life. i don't trust it. i think it is extremely dangerous. i think we have to be very, very careful of religion. it can do great harm and it can do great good. but i do think it is quite easy to trick people. i thought salesmen, politicians, and preachers were all the same. i happen to be a salesman. it is easy to trick people.

we have to be very, very careful of those types of people. i often like to say those with the biggest smiles carry the biggest knives behind their backs so we have to watch it. host: jason, i know you were sent you were raised in a religious children's home. are you religious much now as an adult? caller: you know, as an adult, i have a lot of anger towards religion. i am an atheist. but as i have gotten older, i got so many friends that are religious. and the people that took care of me are religious. you know, it is not such an easy thing to figure out my you know -- out, you know? people are people. host: we appreciate your call this morning. let's chat now with bob in wisconsin. bob is on the republican line. bob, can you hear me?

bob? alright, let's go instead to margaret. margaret in texas, calling as an independent. good morning, margaret. caller: good morning to you. my opinion is that one does not have to belong to a religion to have a code of ethics and morals. we have to remember that all governments are man-made. they are not handed down by god through the scriptures. they are all man-made. the constitution is a man-made document. so i don't think religion should have anything to do in politics. i consider it very, very harmful to try and combine the two. that is why i get very worried

about the supreme court today or anyone that runs on a religious platform. host: alright. before we go to some more calls, we have some robust discussion on our facebook page. i want to read some of the comments people have left there. tony jones on facebook says, we are a secular republic. i have no issue with religion if it stays in its place as a custom that is conducted largely in private. the very many people use religion as a governing philosophy, chaos soon ensues. this has been proven throughout history. peter on twitter says "it would sound simplistic, but i would say that faith unites but religion ultimately divides." doug beasley back on facebook writes, "it depends on how you do it. hating people of other faiths who do not follow your belief is

an indication that you are in a cult, not a religion." and one more from facebook for now. susan guest writes, "if you are in the club, you are united. if not, you are other. and other is the basis for genocide." again, that is some of our comments from social media. we want to hear more from you. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. all the now is james in new jersey on the democratic line. what are your thoughts, james? caller: right, right. good morning. good morning. i have to say this. i love god with all my heart, first of all. and i want to say that i think the religion -- a gentleman

person earlier said faith unites us. i believe that. i grew up as a catholic and then eventually when i became an adult, i went out in the world searching for religion, read the bible, and i have been to baptist, eventually, seven day, pentecostal. i went to all of them in my search for god. i went to churches. i am african-american, black. i have been to african-american churches, big evangelical churches were people were white and i was there, all kinds of churches. i would knock on doors, all kinds of things. what i am saying is that i think that god is real. i think that we, if we have faith, we would be united.

i went to a jewish thing when they die. what i am trying to say is that everybody claims they have religion. they love god, but everybody -- is it a racial thing? what is it? paul i don't is jesus christ said treat everybody like you want to be treated. there is no way in the world that people say they love god and treat other people the way we do. whites treat the blacks this way. this one treats this one that way. i don't go to church anymore because i gave up on religion. it is crazy. with what was going on recently in the capitol and all of the stuff, people say they love god, but come on. we would not be going in there hurting people like this. we would not be going out here and doing this to people. some people need our help. i grew up in a serious, rough neighborhood.

i thought so hard to get out of it. i went to the military. i started getting my life better. wherever you can live and what you can afford, that is what you have in your advisement. i just don't listing how people claim to love god so much and are in churches every sunday. i'm sorry. host: we are going to have to move onto another caller now, james, but we appreciate your comments this morning. let's hear now from walter in new jersey. walter is on the independent line. caller: good morning. hi. merry christmas. host: merry christmas. caller: yeah. you know, i don't feel religion itself is danger. i believe religious fanaticism is dangerous. host: and what do you define as religious fanaticism? what are the indicators that someone has gone to the fanaticism end? caller: like when people blow up

abortion clinics, shoot up a gay bar, something like that. there are other examples of religious fanaticism that may not be as extreme as that. like at a church, they said you had to read and only use one particular bible. i left that church. because i think that is fanatical. host: let's go now to danny. danny is on the republican line in mckenzie, tennessee. you are on, danny. caller: i think religion is made to bring us all together. and if it divides, you are going the wrong way. you got to read the bible

yourself and learn for yourself. jesus walked on earth. he is god. if we believe in god, we live like jesus did, that will bring us all together. host: danny, what do you think the role of religion is when it comes to politics? do you consider a politician's religion when evaluating who to vote for? caller: no. shouldn't do that. should not do that. you got to live like jesus did. he walked the earth and everything. host: alright. appreciate your call this morning, danny. let's go to richmond, virginia, where keith is on the democratic line. caller: good morning and merry christmas, america. i just wanted to just share a thought. i heard, even though i love the

conversation, have not heard the name jesus yet. i wanted to speak that this morning to not only you, and i am sorry i forgot your name, but to america because that is nothing that should unite us. because i want to take a moment if i could to share some scripture from the bible. it won't take but a moment. it is in john, of course, chapter three. of course, we all know verse 16. let me read a few beyond that, please. verse 16 of john three says for god to love the world, he gave his only begotten son, jesus, who forever believes it is in him should not perish but have everlasting life. verse 17 says for god sent not his son to the world to condemn the world, which he could, but that the world might

be. verse 18 says he believes in him is not condemned but he that believes not is condemned already. host:, we appreciate that keith -- keith, we appreciate sharing a bible verses. you shared your religion. what should the role of religion be in politics? should they be something that overlaps? caller: i believe there is an overlapping. if we call ourselves a question at a christian nation, which we know we are divided, but if we are going to call ourselves that and have on the back of the dollar bill "in god we trust," we ought to follow after that. and i believe that jesus is a significant part of our spiritual life. not just our religious life.

i think we get caught up so much in religion that we forget what the bible says. that is why i wanted to share that with you today. because it is not about religion. it is about letting christ come into our hearts and change as. in our government, personal lives, family, everything we can do to do what this day represents. otherwise, like you said, there is no meaning in this space because we get so far away from it because the meaning of life is jesus. as a christian nation, you know, when jesus comes down -- host: we got your point. we are going to move on to another caller now. we are going to talk to jeff in maryland, calling as an independent. good morning. caller: good morning. i would just like for a lot of people to consider that if you call yourself religious, you can

study more than one religion so that you are not just boxed in blinded by the one religion you are trying to follow. learn more about what is going on in the other religions. that would be something that would actually kind of unite. but in general, something else to consider, look from the beginnings of all religion until now how much death, murder, killings have all been done in the name of. religion. that shows it is not just uniting philosophy. host: let's now hear from kelly on the republican line in coppell, texas. caller: coppell. i would like to say very merry christmas to you and everyone.

i just want to say we are very blessed to live in the country that we do and that part of my religion is that we are blessed to be able to worship how, where, and what we may. that is a fundamental principle of this country. and i just kind of am sad to see the things that are going on, you know, whatever christian religion or whatever religion, we are all children of god. part of scripture says doesn't matter if you are rich or poor or anywhere in between, white, brown, yellow, pink, purple, polkadotted, he loves us all equally. i think we forget that in our politics and all the rhetoric and everything that has been going on the last years. that is sad to see.

i think we just need to get back to the fundamental part of judeo-christian religion is we follow the golden rule, we treat others the way we want to be treated, and that is with understanding, love, and compassion. it used to be i cry and sit there when i see a temple being bombed or jewish synagogues tumble or a christian house of worship being bombed or people going in there and they welcome somebody and they go in there and shoot everybody up. you know, i think the person is lost and their soul is lost. host: alright, we got your point. we are going to go to our next caller. that was kelly in coppell, texas. as i reminder, the numbers for you to call. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, your line is (202) 748-8000.

independents, call us at (202) 748-8002. we are taking your calls this morning on the question, does religion unite or divide? our next caller is joe in silver springs, maryland. joe is on the democratic line. go ahead, jump. joe. caller: good morning and thank you for taking my call. i would just like to say that religion is man-made. one of the other callers said that religion is man-made. true religion is christianity. that is what i believe. i also believe that you can -- first you are a christian and secondly you are a politician. yes, your christian values should guide your political decisions and those should be to govern the people.

and i feel the two of them can be separated. but i do not think that religion should ever be the cause of our government to exist. i think the government should exist alongside religion. so thank you. host: ok. let's go now to the independent line. sandra is calling from missouri. caller: hello. hi. first, i want to say i think your hair is really pretty. i see you on tv right now and wanted to say that. first i want to repent -- i want to mention regarding if religion divides, religion is not a person and cannot divide. but i just recently did a college project for my final exam about a week ago. and i did it on the doctrine of

discovery before this land was so-called founded. it was the doctrine of discovery that was put in place that gave the so-called explorers of the world to leave europe and explore lands. and the doctrine of discovery was based on christianity. and it said that if you go and you discover a land and if there are people inhabiting that land, those people are not christians, then those people are savages. they need to be civilized. you can take their land and resources at rape and pillage and do all of that based on the doctrine of discovery. so, yeah, religion divides based on people, what people do, and christianity was man-made. it started in the first century with the romans and constantine.

and it still affects us today because even with religion, once this land was taken from the native people who were brown skinned like myself, the native people, when the land was taken from them based on christianity, and when you fast-forward to 1676, when bacon's rebellion happened in virginia in jamestown in virginia, then they changed it. they changed it from you can enslave non-christians to you can enslave people based on your skin color. bacon's rebellion, after that rebellion happened in virginia in 1676, that is when the indentured servitude changed to slavery based on somebody being black or white. so, yeah, religion divides. i don't believe in any religion. i believe in trying to be a good

person. and i really thank you for taking my call. host: alright. our next caller is on the democratic line. john in south dakota. caller: hello. yes. that last caller was quite intelligent. to piggyback on what she was saying, oligarchs have been using religion for hundreds of years, maybe thousands of years, to control the commons, to colonize the world. currently, i would say in the past 50 years or so, the fossil fuel industry has been using religion and the pro-life movement to make us vote against our own interests. it is our grandchildren that now are going to have to pay a very heavy cost for republicans being misled into voting for what they

thought were religious people in the supreme court. they are fossil fuel corporate people. that is what i have to say. thank you. host: i want to come back to some of our posts on social media. stephen sheppard on facebook writes, "divides. so many bad things are done in the name of religion. religion was made by man and destroyed by man. i think it was made with good intentions to bring people together, but self-serving people took it, manipulated it to get agendas through, and take advantage of people starving for spiritual guidance.." david ross writes on twitter, "beware the question nationalists who are using religion for political power." let's go now to bud in california. bud is on the republican line. go ahead, bud.

caller: hi. how are you doing, everybody? thank you for taking my call. i don't if i as a christian. the last couple callers i think are definitely pushing an agenda. i don't want to accuse anyone, but you are also pushing an agenda. you should be in a nonbiased position right now. host: what is your answer to the question? does religion unite or divide us? caller: ok. thanks for interrupting me. getting to the point, the point is religion unites. i guess that is the word you want to use, religion. but christianity and the church where jesus is preached, not

catholics and mormons, just the normal ones. that unites the people that are in there. it definitely unites. you are going to have a family. it gets really scary when people go out and want to read or look for what is going to fit their agenda as far as this lady is talking about how we got colonized and all that other stuff, how they had a right to do all the stuff you are talking about. you are talking about spaniards with an agenda that were doing some things. it was to go out and conquer. they were conquering. i want to say as far as america goes right now, if you just find a good church and just realize your pastor, if he has the best

interest of the church involved and he tells on himself and he is accountable to the elders, you are in a good church. you are in a bible-based church. and you have to be able to discern. discern a little bit. not everybody -- my problem was i figured you are going to church, you must be the best person in the world. i did it to myself. of course, i got used and abused in a lot of churches. but i let that happen to myself because i thought these people were all angels. because they had not done half of the things i had done in my life. host: alright. let's go down to william in shelby, north carolina. william is on the independent line. what is your answer to today's

question? caller: well, good morning. in the dna, there is the spiritual level which in your religions, seven continents, in the beginning, first three words. in the churches, synagogues, mosques, temples, they are wide open. you are a walking host. you are a holy host. unless you make peace with the darkness, with god, you cannot enter in the light. just you are as a man. abraham, by fate, having made the crossover come across with

one's words. when father called brother moses , the law govern the people, the chosen people, the elect. host: mr. william, you sound like a pretty religious guy. what are your thoughts about, should religion have a place in politics? caller: the thing is they swear by the law of god. that should be implemented first. you did not keep the universal spirit. there is a balance between the darkness. the darkness is two thirds. the light is only one third. brought by his or. only died now to be birthed again from above to receive the crown from the temples all the knowledge that we all possess of creation. there was not a big bang. there was a powwow.

host: ok, let's go on to another caller now. kay in illinois on the democratic line, when is your response to today's question? caller: good morning and merry christmas. i am a retired pastor from a very progressive denomination, and i want to say that religion, yes, human beings create our religions as a response to trying to find god. but any religion, not just pushy entity, but any religion can be abused and used for the wrong reasons. we have a lot of that going around. it seems like that is the predominant image or they get the press, the question nationalists -- the christian nationalists.

that saddens me because there are a lot of cushions and juice and muslims -- christians and jews and muslims and buddhists who are good people. i do not think that any religion should dominate our government. i do not vote for a candidate because someone belongs to my faith or vote against them because belong to another -- because they belong to another faith. i look at their character and the issues they stand for. i think that is what we should all do. there are people of good character in all religions and people of bad character. host: you said you were a pastor. when you were an active pastor, was there in your mind a separation? how much did you talk about politics from the pulpit, if at all? caller: i never told people or

said, you should vote for this candidate or that candidate or another candidate. i said, look at what the character of the person is and what they stand for and make your decision based on that. host: alright. we appreciate your call this morning. let's hear now from michael. michael is calling on the republican line from myrtle beach, south carolina. caller: hello. i wish everybody a merry christmas and happy new year. host: alright, thanks. go ahead, michael. caller: my idea about religion is religion is just a way of life. if you carry your way in a good manner and stay within god's means, that is just the way you are supposed to live. host: so as far as living religiously, how do you think that should impact politics? should it have an impact on the type of politicians? for you, does it impact the kind of politicians you support?

caller: politics are built on religion, so yes. host: alright. appreciate your call this morning. george in ellicott city, maryland, on the independent line, what are your thoughts this morning? caller: good morning. am i on? host: yes. caller: good morning. merry christmas to all. i think the problem is people don't know the word of god himself. we need to have the knowledge of god to be able to separate what man says and what god says. see, organized bodies can misrepresent the word of god to further their own agenda. and the lack of knowledge in god is why we seem like we are doomed. we are destroying ourselves because we can fall for anything

somebody says because you don't know what god said. if you don't know what god said, some will tell you what they want to tell you. and as far as religion and politics, you can live your life because the word says let your light shine before men that they may see your good works and glorify your father. you have to live it. so somebody will admire it. you don't have to. jesus did not put anything on us. you have to live your life and let me see your life and i follow that life. i think if we do that, we will live in peace. i wish everybody a happy christmas. thank you. host: let's go down to fayetteville, north carolina. felix is on the democratic line. felix, are you with us this morning?

felix? alright. let's try christina in redford, michigan, on the republican line. you are on, christina. caller: hi and good morning. i just wanted to not be on a soapbox after hearing this first thing in the morning. religion is a divider. religion is a set of morals we follow. and as far as it being in our politics, it is not as adequate as it should be. that is something that we as our own type of people that have portrayed as this is how we live. it is a business. politics are business. religion is how you live by. i just wanted to spit that out. [laughter] host: let's go now back to social media for a few more comments from facebook and

twitter. on twitter, one right "i can support -- "that is a wall i can support building, between church and state." "having two best friends with two religions can encounter friction when their celebration rituals come into conflict, a jewish friend not able to visit a christian's christmas party." don cox writes on facebook "divides like hell because people have to force their beliefs on you. does and has always." back to the phone lines for more of your calls. in florida, mike is on the democratic line. mike? caller: yes. good day. host: hello. caller: blessed day to all

humans on the earth. host: alright. caller: i am muslim and no one has mentioned that the biggest fake and religion since before my time and growing up and still going on is that white fake painting, a light painting of christ, jesus christ. how can a white man come from africa among african people be jesus christ? and up to this day, people recognize the white fake thing? i asked pastors about that and they preach that if they want to have a congregation. another thing that has been going on in the world is they

are waiting for the antichrist. all denominations, christianity, buddhist, all denominations. the sabbath day, the scriptures. but one thing all of them are united on is that white fake christ. you never hear any religion coming up against that. especially black people should realize that is a fake. you cannot have a white christ in africa, come from africa. even the santa claus business, christmas thing. jesus christ was not born on the 25th of december in the bible. nowhere at all. it is a moneymaking thing to keep black people in slavery, economic slavery.

physical slavery, right now it is economic slavery to black people. wake up, my people. open up your eyes. do not allow anyone to tell you about it. go and research. it is there for you to see for yourself. host: ok, let's go to another caller now. art is on the republican line in bonita springs, florida. you are on, mark. caller: yes, thank you c-span. every christmas to those out there worshiping. the reason why religion is a uniter or the fighter, the reason there are 2000 different kinds of religion, and the reason why it is different for each person and everybody here tells you what they think religion is is because it is made up. it is all completely made up. it is taught to our parents. it is taught by our grandparents. that is why when you are a

when-year-old, two you welcome a three-year-old, you, which is why christian parents have christian kids and jewish parents have jewish kids and it sent right down the line. so god is pretty much whatever we make him say to us. if that is what we think god sends to us, it is an overhead and we can think whatever we want to think. thank you. host: our next caller is roger on the democratic line in fort wayne, indiana. caller: good morning, everybody. happy holidays. my opinion is i think religion is a divider. i personally believe that what the son of god left us, which was eternal life and the good news that man took that and turned that into religion. i think religion is like

effort. it is what you used to pat yourself on the back and say, look at what i have done. look what i am doing to make myself write. as opposed to what the son of god has done. i firmly believe that what today's christianity in this country is doing is dividing all of us. you got the high and mighty christianity folks who are saying, well, we are more righteous than you. look at your sins. because of your sins, that makes us more right than you. i am losing my train of thought, but i do believe that christianity is not of god. it is man-made.

and that whole religion is not of god at all. host: alright. and now, let's talk to robbie in georgia on the republican line. robbie? caller: yes, ma'am. host: you are on. go ahead. caller: yes, good morning. merry christmas to all. watching your title, it says, does it unite or divide us? religion does both because it gives us -- it tells us we all have free will that is given to us. if you believe in the lord, believe in god, jesus, you have free will. it is up to us. it is not like we decided our politicians. we vote. if you count your votes and who is elected by free will, if you

believe in christ, you still have to pray for those who are elected, whether you don't agree with them or you do agree with them. it is your free will. if you follow christ, he asks us to pray for those in power. you pray for them and that host: all right. we are going to come back to this o religion later in the show. but first, we have author and law school professor frank buckley, who will be discussing his new book, "progressive conservatism: how republicans will become america's natural governing party." we will be right back. ♪ >> and with great confidence in

our caucus i will not seek the election to democratic leadership in the next congress. >> in november nancy pelosi announced she was stepping down, and today, christmas day, we will talk with journalist susan page. we will discuss the lawmakers most memorable moments as party leader, using the c-span archives. >> by electing me speaker you have brought us closer to the ideal of equality that is america's heritage and america's hope. this is an historic moment, and i think the leader for acknowledging it. it is a historic moment for the congress, it is a historic moment for the women of america. [applause] >> watch our conversation on nancy pelosi's career today at 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span, and online at c-span.org.

♪ >> the 118th congress convenes on tuesday, january 3 for the first time in two years they will return to offers -- return to washington as a divided government. republicans will control the congress, while democrats retain control of the senate. the average age is younger compared to the previous session. the new congress will also be more diverse, with a record number of women serving. the 118th congress holds the election for the speaker of the house. new congress, new leaders. watch the opening day of the 118 congress tuesday, january 3, at noon eastern on c-span and c-span2. also on c-span now, our video app, or online at c-span.org.

>> there are a lot of places to get political information, but only at c-span do you get it straight from the source. no matter where you're from or where you stand on the issues, c-span is america's network. unfiltered, unbiased, word for word. if it happens here or here, or here, or anywhere that matters, america is watching on c-span. our by cable. >> "washington journal" continues. host: we are back this morning with frank buckley. he is a professor at the george mason university school of law. but he is also the author of a new book titled "progressive conservatism: how republicans will become america's natural governing party." good morning and welcome to "washington journal." guest: good morning to you.

host: first, let's start off here. what do you mean by the term progressive conservatism. it sounds like an oxymoron. guest: yeah, that is why i chose it, actually. it is the name of van -- of an older conservative party. some of the great leaders of the republican party were people who call themselves progressive. eisenhower said that. teddy roosevelt said that. and lincoln had some big, progressive ideas as well. i thought, you know, the problem with the gop has been, over the last 60 years it has invested in a lot of right wing ideology, and it has not gotten them anyway. i think what you want to do is get back to an earlier party. in part trump, whose political career is thankfully over, showed that, you know, the new ideas he brought to the party

were ideas that brought a whole bunch of new voters to the party . while you don't want to see him again in office, you don't want to say goodbye to the people he brought to the party. that is going to be a progressive party. host: so, do you think trump was a progressive conservative? guest: well, he was basically a mess in many respects, but the campaign he led in 2016 had a whole bunch of new themes. and those new themes brought new people to the party. those other things i'm talking about. i'm talking about progressive policies, not the individual. host: got it. give me some examples. for people watching, what did trump do? he is the most recent example. give us some examples of what is progressive conservatism in his platform. guest: i will give you a couple. one is immigration reform. the idea is not just putting up a wall, it is having a policy

that welcomes people into the country. in particular what he suggested was something like an -- a canadian immigration system, which even the "washington post" would be a good idea. health care would be another example. most americans worry about going to the hospital and coming out bankrupt, right? ordinary visits are fine, but it is catastrophic medical that bothers people. i think there is a role for national government to do something about that. that is what most americans want. those are a couple of ideas. in part i'm talking about things which are recognizably liberal, but also things which are conservative as well. host: i want to read an excerpt of your book as you are talking about this. you write, "we have come to a dead end and will not see a way back except through a recovery of the mystique of american purity and in the republican

virtue of the founders, in the gop's great leaders. and the content they gave to our idea of the common good." guest: i think most americans are tired of the rank or -- ra over the pastnc couple of years. or -- rancor over the past couple of years. americans are not perfect, but pretty good. that is as good as it gets. while we have so many people in the media try to, basically merchandise hatred, let's back away from that and recognize the goodness of american people and how most of us support a whole bunch of ideas that are, you know, decent, progressive, liberal, and conservative at the same time. that is really what i meant.

and i think may be at this point what we can do is recognizing that recall that this is a pretty good country, it is christmas time. maybe the time has come to say, look, we are better than all of that, right? we have had horrible problems, we are trying to get over them. begin by recognizing we have a shared idea of the common good. host: and we want to get you in on this conversation. if you have a question for mr. buckley or a comment on this topic you can start calling in now. republicans, your line is (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. go ahead and start calling in, because we are going to get to the phone lines in a moment. mr. buckley, your title makes the case that the republican party will become the governing

party. what makes you believe that? guest: maybe there is a little bit of hope thrown into that, ok? what i'm saying is, if the republican party ditched the ideology that separates it from a whole bunch of -- well, the majority of the american people -- then it could become the party that most americans could support. maybe the democrats could match that. fine. but at this point i think the opening is there for the republican party if it tries to become that party which unites all americans. that is how the party started. let's go back to that. host: so, when i read the first chapter and skimmed through the book, it seemed -- correct me if i'm wrong, but it seemed you were looking for progressive policies on, kind of economic issues, maybe even criminal justice issues.

but on cultural issues like gay rights, it seemed you were pretty conservative. is that your vision for progressive conservatism? that it is still pretty conservative on the cultural issues, but progressive on other types of issues? is that an accurate description? guest: you are really pressing me. that is a tough one. that i would like to say is that the progressive party would be one which would be welcoming to people whatever their sexual preferences are. but, you know, at the same time there are other issues which are distinctly conservative which i support. for example, i don't think children in grade school have to be exposed to gender ideology. i don't think that is right if you are a six-year-old. things like that, where, you know, the gay rights movement have -- having gotten so far in so short a time, recognizes it

has to stop short when it comes to children, for example. that would be one example. host: ok, and -- we talked a little bit about donald trump. who are some other current leaders in the republican party that you believe fall under that progressive conservatism label? guest: again, you are asking me really tough questions, because i don't know them, all right? i'm saying, here is what you want to do if you want to attract voters. host: got it. guest: ok? who are the people who could do that? if we are going to be partisan, we have a governor in virginia, avenue youngkin, who i think is a gentleman. when nancy pelosi's husband was attacked governor youngkin made a crack about that. what he did afterwards was interesting. he sent a letter of apology to nancy pelosi.

i thought, gosh, you know, was the last time you heard about a politician doing something really decent, right? there isn't that much of it around, but when you see it you think, oh, that's pretty good. obama could do that. the current crop of republicans, well, i don't know, no? -- i don't know, you know? the senator from louisiana is a funny guy. i like him, for example. host: ok. let's go to the phone lines now. our first caller of this segment is tom in lawrenceburg, indiana, calling on the democratic line. what is your question or comment, tom? caller: thanks for having me. back to the definition of progressive. on the scale, where would ronald reagan fall?

most politicians measure themselves on -- well, it was trumpism, but it was reaganism before that. it would measure themselves, how much like reagan are there policies? guest: i didn't get all that. host: he was basically saying, where you think ronald reagan falls on that scale of progressive conservatism? guest: not high on the progressive side. i had to go back to dwight eisenhower to find somebody i like. what happened to the republican party after eisenhower is, it made a hard-right turn. that was seen in people like real -- like reagan. reagan said famously, i didn't leave the democratic party, it left me. but that really wasn't much the way he governed. on a lot of issues. for example, civil rights. he is known for policy issues --

foreign policy issues more than domestic. on domestic issues he was more conservative. dwight eisenhower was someone who rick is that the party and didn't like it. host: you brought up eisenhower. things have you studied of eisenhower that make you think he is the standardbearer for this ideal you have? guest: the first thing he did is, he made his peace with the new deal, just what was the americans wanted at that point, right? making your peace with the new deal today would involve saying, look, have made progress in a whole bunch of areas. we are not going to try to roll it back. most americans would not want that in any event. eisenhower also had a pretty good record, really, a much better-than-average record on things like civil rights. he was really ahead of his time on those kinds of issues. harry truman said, poor ike,

he's going to say this and nothing will happen. ike was a guy who, during his administration, desegregated the military and d.c. schools. on a bunch of cultural issues at the time he was decidedly very much a liberal. when the sit ins started in north carolina he said, they should be served. if they can shop there they should be able to have lunch there. he just by instinct was on the right side of those issues. so, gosh, i miss that. host: let's hear now from newton in tallahassee, florida on the republican line. caller: how are you? shout out to the duke alums. i'm a little curious here how the perception of republicans will become, this governing group, you have had the tea party, and now trumpets.

neither one were really republicans. they want to be something different. so, therefore what will -- what you would consider gop or republicans no longer exists. a handful, the romney's or whatever, or silenced by the new generation, a new viewership of republicans, which are not republicans. they are really something else. guest: yeah, like, what is a republican today? the party is a bit of a mess. let's were number one thing. when trump came to debate the other contenders for the nomination in 2016, all of them were kind of standard issue republicans, and he was the outlier. in so many ways. one of the ways in which he shook things up was, look, we are talking about a different kind of foreign policy. we are talking about issues like migration, that nobody else wants to talk about. and we are talking about an

america that is hurting in the middle. you know, the jobs have disappeared and people are hurting. in the party doesn't seem to have room to talk about that, right? i mean, what we had was an ideological party that conveyed a sense there were 100% pure when it came to their ideology, but not so good when taking about people. that is not the message that is going to win too many votes, politically. when we looked at how people voted at the time, most people who voted were economically middle-of-the-road war left of center. and socially conservative. ok? so, i'm describing that as the sweet spot in american politics. i'm saying conservative with respect to a lot of social issues, and middle-of-the-road at least, or left of center with respect to economic issues. that would be my definition of

progressive conservatism. host: let's go now to south carolina. mary is on the independent line. caller: good morning. can you hear me? host: yes, you are on. go ahead, mary. caller: i would really love to see the labels taken off of everything. however, if the -- i'm sorry, i'm kind of emotional because humanity -- i just wish everybody would have respect for anybody's religion, anybody's political ways in life. and our country would be better for it. and that is really all i wanted to say. thank you. guest: mary, i think you are right. yeah, i tossed a label out there. what can i say?

i'm guilty. really what i wanted to do is move away from ideology and concentrate more on people. i thought a party like that would do very well, so, you know, i think what i would like is a party that doesn't want to check off all of the right wing boxes, but concerns itself mostly with how people are faring. that would be my idea of a d.o.b.. -- gop. host: let's go to philadelphia. mohammed is on the democratic line. caller: yes, happy holidays and good morning to c-span, and thank you for taking my call. i have a couple of questions. i was wondering, how can the republican party compared to president lincoln and the honorable frederick douglass and the abolitionist john brown? they was pretty progressive in

their day and time. how could the republican party get to where they was at? guest: the party has changed. i will grant you that. i would like to go back to that time. lincoln was remarkable for a lot of things, but one of them was his economic policies were really, really progressive. of course, civil rights, absolutely. 100%. but take a look at the other stuff the guy did. quite apart from the 13th amendment and the civil or, he would have been one of the most mentis presidents of the 19th century by virtue of his domestic policies. well, you know, domestic policies is what it is really all about for americans. how are we faring? so, i think the gop has forgotten that. it has signed on to an ideology, and what it has forgotten is,

ideologies don't tell you much about people. lincoln had better instincts in that respect, and so have the other people i have mentioned. teddy roosevelt and dwight eisenhower. these were fabulously-popular people and they call themselves progressive. host: again, we are talking with frank buckley. his new book is titled "progressive conservatism: how republicans will become america's natural governing party." is also a law professor at george mason university. you can call us. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. with any questions or comments you have. it's going out to gordon. worden is calling from florida on the republican line. caller: thank you for taking my call. frank, you wrote an article

recently called "the silver look for student that is encrypted. go -- is bankruptcy." it is required by the constitution's uniformity clause and it would tend down some of the -- tamp down some of the lending. i have a question for you. on the 27th, the last day the senate and the house meet, my view is if they do not pass this bill students will get hurt and nurses and doctors are in shortage because they cannot afford it. but the taxpayer will crash the dollar. i want to ask you, what parliamentary procedure can make the pro forma senate passed the bill that senator dick durbin -- by jerry nadler, who is a parliamentary genius. what do you suggest they do to pass the bills and what do you

think of my suggestion they try to pull this off? i am a republican, but it would help the nation. i am a christian first. i don't care if it helps the democrats. if we are going to crash the dollar, stop loaning and bleeding us to death. i'm a heavyweight conservative. i nearly won the biggest case since roe v. wade. host: from what i have read, that was something that was a long-standing position of yours, and you updated it recently with a discussion on student loan relief. what is your thought? guest: the idea was, we have a whole generation indebted up to the hilt on student debt, and we would like to find some way to cure the problem. look, if you owe everything you could conceivably earn to pay off a loan, that is a form of

debt slavery, ok? let's start by trying to rescue those people. at the same time, again, responding to what gordon just said, i have a real problem with spending. inflation is terrible. that is a spending problem. have to be careful about spending new moneys. we have to figure out a way of uncoupling forgiveness of student loans with something which is not going to bust the bank. what i ended up recommending was too full. i said, look, there is no particular reason why we need to guarantee student debt where tuition is more than 20,000 a year. they can go to state colleges, right? if you want to send your kid to an ivy league debt costs $70,000 a year, but daddy pay for it. a way of curing the problem is to make the universities bear the brunt of it, by fixing them

with liability for bankruptcy debt discharge. what they are doing is, they are educating people -- or miss educating people -- with degrees which caused a heck of a lot of money and which make the students unemployable thereafter. so, you know, if you make the universities concerned about whether or not they will -- there will be jobs for their graduates, you will have a complete revolution in higher ed, and you will also cure the student debt problem. what i think is toxic right now for young people is, the idea that they are permanently cut off from the economy because of their debt load. host: up next we have george in pine ridge, south dakota calling us as a democrat. caller: hello, good morning. host: you are on, george. caller: i wanted to make a couple of quick comments. i think mr. buckley is looking for a future agenda for the

republicans. i don't see how they can call themselves progressive. the vast majority of the elected are against abortion, they are against the gay trans issues, they are burning books, they are banning schoolbooks, they are against critical race theory, which should be legitimate educational process, called the truth in some places. they are election denies. over one hundred 30 of our elected representatives are election deniers, republicans. they do not reflect their constituency. the racism issue and jim crow laws that are coming back across the country, in the gerrymandered areas, where elected republicans over democrats. and the supreme court bias, with scalia and thomas.

corruption on their behalf. the republicans' failures on immigration to sit down seriously at the table and do immigration reform. their support of inflation issue, which i call corporate greed, lack of policies regarding price controls and this and that. i know for a fact a lot are driven by corporate greed. excuse me. host: george, you raised a lot of points. i want to give professor buckley a chance to respond. guest: george, i agree with many of the points you raised. i can't answer all of them, can i? but, you know, it has been the democratic party in power for the last two years, solidly in power. if you are not happy about the way things are right now i don't thank you necessarily want to blame the gop. it is fair game, and it is not

as if the gop has come up with responses to a lot of these issues. you are right there. in the end we are divided over a lot of cultural issues, and, frankly, i am kind of a federalist on those issues. i don't like -- i don't think a one-size-fits-all is going to work in the united states. i think as much as possible if you turn issues back to the states, let people find local solutions, that may be the best solution could possibly have. that would be a gop-type of response. host: up next, we have ted in boston on the independent line. caller: good morning. what you cannot use a federalist response for is things like basic human rights. and you skirted around that in a disingenuous way, which is reflective of the current day

conservatives that we see. it is so weak. i can't believe it. i can't even believe i just heard what you said. that we have to give states rights for forcing women to have babies, for personhood of gay and trans people, for basic worker rights, for basic human rights. these conservatives are disingenuous religious fanatics. you are one of them. banning books, basic covid science, election deniers, climate change, guns. what is next? i can't even take you seriously. host: let's let professor buckley respond. guest: i get the idea k doesn't agree with me on a whole bunch of things. look, it really would be helpful to turn down the dial emotionally a little bit. that means not trying to demonize guys who disagree with you.

that's going to be a tough call for a lot of people. but, you know, on abortion, yeah, it has been turned back to the states, effectively. and i think we are going to have to live with that and see how that settles out. i will say one thing about conservatives in all of this. conservatives who are antiabortion, which is an honorable position, for heaven sakes, have said, gosh, look at europe. europe is a lot more conservative than we are on abortion. what the conservative states are talking about right now is roughly mimicking a european position, which is restricting abortion after, say, 20 weeks or so. so that is kind of the middle-of-the-road solution people move toward in europe, and it is probably where we are headed now. host: let's go back to the phone

lines, carl in washington, d.c. is calling on the republican line. caller: thank you for having me. i guess i wandered into the republican line, thank you for taking my call. i'm calling because i think what might be beneficial if we are talking about lincoln's, can somebody really help us get back to the notion of the radical republicans that enacted a lot of lincoln's policies, basically? i think we have lost track of, you know, what is the definition of a radical republican? it almost sounds like an oxymoron. the idea is to say, when was the last radical republican retired out of congress, to the point where that was no longer a movement? and then it kind of came the party of the plutocrats. i'm a bit of a historian. you have the panic of 1893, which made an -- which made a seismic economic shift. which shifted everybody's views

of what was important. we might be able to dial that a little bit if we can take us back. it sounds like professor buckley has a little bit of knowledge in this area. and kind of walk us through this weird crossroads where we are coming back from people power, radical action, to something where the economics of today's economy are literally not working too good. thank you. guest: i appreciate that. i agree with you entirely. the radical republicans were a group of people in the late 1860's who wanted to see reconstruction happened in the south, and they had the right of it. the gop in history, as you noted, goes through cycles. you had a liberal moment with lincoln and the radical republicans. followed by a dip into extreme right-wing policies. followed by udo roosevelt, you

know, very much a progressive. followed by calvin coolidge, right? so, you get these movements between a liberal part of the republican party a conservative wing. i'm saying, it's time to let the liberal wing of the republican party have the lead of the party, and go after the votes. i think that's where the votes are. host: i want to read along that same topic another excerpt from your book. it says, "progressive conservatism is one of america's oldest political traditions. its origins lie in the land of democracy and the fresh start. while it supported free markets it never asked the economists to solve all of our social problems. it recognized thne for a welfare safety net, but did so out of a sensef fraternity and not in service of some abstract theory.

it. that all lives mattered and left racial politics for the democrats." guest: hey, that sounds pretty good to me. host: the current state of the party now, if the republican party has to change, where would you suggest the party start? guest: well, you mentioned a couple of things. one is the idea of the gop as a western party. i'm originally from out west. if you are from out west you have a different view about these things. you have a sense of, you know, the basic idea of america being one where everybody can get ahead, right? that is what the west historically has represented. that was the frontier thesis of frederick jackson turner. i think we would like that party to return, and one of the things that was so important in recent

years was the discovery we are no longer mobile, right? if the idea is -- if the american idea is, this is a country where everybody can get ahead, where ever you are from, only the american ideal has migrated to other countries that are a lot more mobile than we are. you know, the country of mobility is denmark, canada, or scandinavia. those policies are something you should be interested in if you are interested in the american idea. and you should be ashamed, i think, if we are no longer mobile in that particular way. that was a promise of america. don't get me wrong. i'm not trying to beat up on america. i think it is a great country and people want to immigrate here properly, that i think there are things you want to do to improve things. so i've pointed to countries where tuition is ridiculously

low, so you don't get that slavery out of young students. i'm talking about countries that have decent medical care systems , right? these are all things which tend to promote mobility. or a great education system. if you want to start faulting the democrats, you know, if there is something we should all be able to agree on, it is that our k-12 schools are doing a terrible job educating people. we are at the back of the pack in terms of how our students are doing. that is going to have an effect on mobility. those are all-important things for all americans, whatever your party. host: let's go back to the phone lines. patrick in washington, d.c.'s on the democratic line. caller: professor buckley, i noticed that you omitted the name of another republican who

was governor of california when i grew up in the 1940's and 1950's. this republican was a girl warren -- earl warren. while governor warren was in charge he was able to institute free -- free -- tuition at the community college level. and for those who went on to four-your colleges, like san francisco state, there was only a nominal fee, as i recall, back in 1957, 1958, 1959. $30 a semester. even at the university of california it was less than $1000 for your tuition.

and also, this republican, earl warren, had gotten ill in the 1940's, and he saw how expensive hospitalization was for the average person. he tried to institute a state insurance program for the residents of california. i would like to have you comment on that, please. host: well, patrick, -- guest: well, patrick, i'm delighted to hear all of that. i don't know much except warren brought the delegation to support eisenhower. he was very much an eisenhower republican. all of that is very interesting information. i should like to know more and i will follow that up. i thank you. host: let's go now to andrea in amherst, massachusetts, on the

independent line. caller: thank you. good morning morning, merry christmas, happy holidays. mr. buckley, speak of republican progressivism in the party, but i don't understand why you think it could bring together a majority of voters when the party continues to stigmatize lgbt americans. with respect to your early -- earlier stated dislike of gender ideology in schools, there is not an age where learning about consent is improper. so if a pastor is trying to groom them they have the knowledge to protect themselves. the fear of gender ideology in schools is the fear of a future generations accepting as normal our lgbt neighbors, friends, and kids. progressivism in the republican party is dead if it does not accept that lgbt americans are

valuable. i think the majority of americans already understand this, and republicans are not on the side of progress or reason with respect to this. guest: i think we will agree to disagree. i agree with you that, of course, gay americans deserve respect. as much as everyone else. but i do not think that tells us about teaching about gender issues for people in grade one. i simply disagree with you. host: our next caller is surely in new castle, pennsylvania, calling as a republican. you are on, surely -- shirley. caller: thank you for taking my call. mr. buckley, you started by telling us how bad president trump was. well, if people look back, those

four years were very successful years for this great, big united states of america. we had things going on then that we did not have before, and we certainly don't have now. right now what we have is one lies, and the other one backs it up. that is wrong. he had the economy going. he had the border under control. you are not paying five dollars for a gallon of gas. and, you know what? when that man told you something, you could take it to the bank, because that is the way it was. it was the truth. now, he could go out to these foreign countries and he got along with all of them. you know why? because they knew that he meant is this. -- meant business. he was in charge of the united

states of america. and whether they liked it or not, they knew they were not going to get along with no monkey business, because he was not going to stand for it. he stood for the united states of america. and that's what we need now. and every republican that voted for that bill this past week needs to be voted out immediately. they are disgusting. they are not true republicans. host: all right, let's give professor buckley time to respond. guest: you are talking about a guy i voted for in 2016 and 2020, and whom i would never vote for again. while you are correct about the state of the economy doing the trump years, yet i think the man so disgraced himself at the end that he never should be elected again. and never would be elected again.

however much a trump supporter you are, i think one has to sit down and say, look, you know, this dog won't hunt. this is not somebody who can ever be elected again. he lost in 2018 and 2020, and 2022. the man is a three-time loser. you have to look somewhere else, i'm afraid. host: we are taking your calls for professor frank buckley, whose book is titled "progressive conservatism: how republicans will become america's natural governing party." i want to read a question from sally sue.it says, how will progressive conservatives bring the members of cpac, heritage foundation, and the federalist society to your new party? to your new vision of the party, these conservative groups? guest: you know, there is a tendency to demonize people with whom you disagree.

and people point to the federalist society as a horrible organization. in fact, it is a group of conservative lawyers. and i know many of these guys. i think they are perfectly decent people. as our their opposite numbers in the american constitution society. they are people with whom evidently you disagree, but that does not make them hateful, even though you might hate them yourself. i think we should step back and say, look, you know, reasonable people to disagree about things, and that is all. that doesn't make them terrible people. your deeper question is, how do you bring them into the fold of a progressive party? you know, the answer is got to be, look, we tried with your right wing ideology, and it didn't get us terribly far. you guys are essentially perpetual losers, unless you try

something different. i'm suggesting something different. host: republicans, your number to call is (202) 748-8001. the crowds, -- democrats, (202) 748-8000. and independents, (202) 748-8002 . our next caller is kathy from albuquerque, new mexico, on the democratic line. caller: merry christmas. i can't disagree with what was said, which surprised me. i was going to say those things about trump. i don't know how the republicans, it seems like they have an allegiance trump, and there is not many people like cheney around. they are not willing to stand up to a person who has divided this country. and everything else i agree with professor buckley on. sometimes i find that republicans, for certain things they want to go back to the

states, but when it comes to the gun issue that is a different situation. it doesn't seem like there is no consistency there. i want to say i do agree with what you said, and this division, we need to get along and turn down the volume a little bit. anyway, thank you for your comments. guest: thank you, kathy. you know, on gun laws there is a second amendment, right? and it is just there, and you are not going to change it. a lot of professors are real good at coming up with these wonderful ideas. all we have to do is an amended this, amend that in our constitution. that's not going to happen. have to play the game according to the rules. the rules are specified by the constitution. they limit what you can do. within that there is plenty of room for change and improvement. host: she mentioned liz cheney. what are your thoughts on some of those republicans who are known as standing up to trump, you know, do they fit the bill

of progressive conservatism? guest: yeah, they were the salvation of the party. but for the republican leaders who said, no, we're going to have a new president, but for people like dick cheney, we would have been in terrible shape. the country owes a tremendous debt to those people. and probably -- i don't know if the guy has a political future. he's probably going to run again, whatever happens we should honor them. host: let's go to another caller now. kyle in buffalo, new york is calling on the republican line. caller: good morning, professor, c-span, everody. happy holidays, merry christmas, hanukkah, everything. i wanted to touch on something i have not heard anybody address, about the changing of the parties around kennedy, especially with the african-american vote.

i don't think a lot of people know that 50%, at one point, voted republican in the kennedy-nixon era. what you see now is the old democrats who are now republicans, and they are the ones messing things up. the idea of the republican party still exists, but has been sabotaged by those old-school democrats who are now republicans. and i would like to hear a little bit more about that. if you would like to talk about that. guest: i agree. i agree totally with what you just said. there was a movement in the gop called the southern strategy to court former democrats, bring them into the gop. and that was a complete reversal of what the gop had stood for up to that point. you know, up to 1960 the gop was a civil rights party, right?

i mean, the first great civil rights bill was a 1957 statute which was eviscerated by the democrats, by lyndon johnson, but, you know, the impulse to make things better came from the gop at that particular point. and prominent african-americans at that point were people who were solid republicans. so, gosh, i miss that party. host: our next caller is mike. mike is in stamford, connecticut , on the independent line. caller: good morning, everybody. merry christmas to you all. i would like to talk about the conservatives. you know, ever since you go back to bush, he was a total conservative. what does conservative mean? to me it means to save money, to not send as much -- spend as much. he went over the top. he spent more money than anyone else.

then you fast-forward to the next president, joe clinton. conservative republicans spent two years going after him. then you get to trump. these people, everything was great, don't you remember? the trump virus, how he led it into the country? and he is a christian conservative, he and his bible? remember him holding his bible upside down? that was something. i don't know how people can call themselves conservative republicans. you want to have a christian nation, you have that little blonde with bad skin, she wants everyone to be christian in this country. it is crazy. we are open to anything. you can be any religion you want. isn't that in the constitution? what is the matter with these people? have a merry christmas. guest: thank you very much. [laughter] you got me laughing. excuse me. look, i agree with you. this is not a denominational country.

it never was, it never should be. we are too big for that. instead, we are the kind of country that takes people in from different backgrounds and different faiths and makes them americans. gosh, i kind of like that. that was kind of the magic of being an american. you know, it takes a generation to turn somebody into a frenchman, but in america it takes 15 minutes. so, you know, there is this electric for that unites all of us, lincoln said. the electric cord is allegiance to the liberal principles of the constitution, as restated by lincoln, right? he said, that's what makes you an american. allegiance that set of liberal ideas. that which is not liberal is not american. host: on the line now from pennsylvania is bill, calling as a democrat. go ahead, bill.

caller: yes, merry christmas to everybody. i believe either party keeps running the way day -- keeps running the way they do, we will have no parties in eight years. obstructionist, just like the republican side. obstructionists just like we have on the democratic side when they have the house and senate this country is going for a quick slide. we have 1% of the population telling us what we can say. we have the lgbt community saying we are the ones that are right and everybody has to follow suit for us. don't say this and don't say that. well, your 1%, freedom of speech is freedom of speech. and hate mongers hatemonger. there is a difference. this country is going for a fast slide down the hill, and neither side is going to win. we are going to have nothing for the next two years. nothing. guest: well, bill, i never bet

against the home team. i don't think i am as pessimistic as you are. maybe there is something on which we disagree. whatever you can say about the gop now, if they contains pending -- contains pending a little bit, they will have done great good for the american people. one of our real problems right now is inflation. we have got to get a hold of it, and throwing money out the door with enormous spending packages is going to be the worst thing for continuing inflation. so, that has got to stop, and hopefully a gop house. that. guest: on -- host: on the republican line now from florida, pierre, you are on. caller: thank you very much. when i was young i was a democrat. and before it was no problem what side you voted on. but now you vote, the neighbor

will hate you. yet everybody is against everybody. when did this turn out like this, you know? this is what i can't understand. it did not matter before what side you voted on, but now it does. guest: yeah. caller: this is bull hockey. guest: i agree with you entirely. i started the program by saying, you know, it is christmas, and maybe it is time for us to just record highs that we are all pretty good people, or, you know, we are all equally fallen, if you will, right? so, let's try and concentrate on the things that unite us rather than dividers. we have invested too much in politics, i think. and in particular the politics of resentment and hatred. that is corrosive and does such horrible things to one.

41's own good, i think it is time to let the guard down a little bit. host: our next caller is rob in lawrenceburg, new york on the independent line. go ahead, rob. caller: hi, mr. buckley. this is a two-part question if you have the time. what is your definition for the natural governing parties? guest: what would make a naturally -- a natural governing party? the idea of a party that clearly has the good of all americans behind it, or as its goal, right? as opposed to a party that tries to divide us, right? and right now the gop it seems to me has the opportunity of eating that party. -- being that party. caller: oh. as opposed to the unnatural governing parties? guest: as opposed to a party

that says, look, it is us versus them. caller: it always is. host: let's take a call now from carol in pittsburgh, pennsylvania. carol is calling as a democrat. here you are. go ahead, carol. caller: merry christmas. mr. buckley, you had mentioned that you voted for trump in 2016 and 2020. you mean you did not see before where he was headed? now all of a sudden you have changed your mind and you are going to go a different path? guest: yep. caller: we almost lost your democracy while you were making up your mind. guest: well, you know, we are not all gifted with 100%

foresight, so i don't know anybody who really would have predicted the disaster that trump turned out to be after he lost the election in 2020. of course, had we know that, sure, hindsight is 2020. we would have changed our mind. i did not see that one coming, i've got to be honest. and, you know, maybe out of the goodness of your heart can forgive people for not having a perfect power of prediction. host: speaking of trump and moving on, there has been recent polling. there is this one from suffolk university in "usa today." nearly two thirds of republicans identified as either conservative or very conservative, 55% say they want governor ron desantis to run for president, and 66% of those voters s they prefer him to formerdent donald trump.

--ublican sheriff in town, says the dr of the self woke political research center. dentis out-pulled trump among these republican-leaning voters who have in the former president's base. republicans and conservative independents increasingly want to trumpism without trump. he talked about liking trump's politics. do you think ron desantis fits the bill of progressive conservatism? guest: i don't know about that. he is certainly the front runner right now, but, gosh, we are talking three years away for 2024, and that is a huge period of time. other people may emerge as well. what desantis has going for him is toughness, you know? sending busloads of migrants here and there. i have my own preference. i kind of like my governor of virginia, governor youngkin, who

is less of a palm-thrower, more of a -- forgive me -- gentlemen. somebody who resembles eisenhower more than desantis. it is all well to one a guy who projects extreme toughness, which desantis does. and desantis has a great cv, is an honorable, decent guy. i tend to incline more toward the cheneys, -- the dick cheneys, or governor youngkins. that is me. i don't have a movement. [laughter] host: we are here for your input, your thoughts. let's go now to william, north bend, oregon. independent line. you are on. caller: good morning. happy holidays and merry christmas. the purpose of my telephone call for author frank buckley is, how can in this day and age, when we

have 8 billion people on planet earth, and alone 354 million domestic here in the united states of america, how can we continue -- how can they continue to be a dispute between -- and i'm going to use the word so-called conservatism -- conservatism and liberalism? it took for ministrations to restore. we had the new deal. we had the civilian conservation corps. we had the national recovery act and how it lifted us up as a government. then, after harry s truman and

dwight eisenhower and john f. kennedy, then there began that tax down to 74%. that was during john f. kennedy. you get past gerald ford, jimmy carter, nixon was the one who took us away from the currency. host: we are going to have to let you wrap up and let the professor respond. guest: i agree about fdr. if you read my book, i've got a lot of good things to say about fdr. he combined the quality of a perfect gentleman with a fire. he had the interest of ordinary americans and mine. i do have a problem with the democrats. my problem is i think they have

become an elite party that has shown itself not interested in how the rest of america fares, but for the very poor. there is a vast gap in the middle which represents most americans. whoever they voted for, the party that seeks to lead america should be a party for all americans. i got along rambling answer. host: thank you so much. we've been talking with frank buckley. the title of his new book is progressive conservatism, how republicans will become america's natural governing party. guest: merry christmas. host: next, we are returning to

our question we started off the show with. does religion unite or divide? start calling and up. republics, (202) 748-8000. decrats (202) 748-8000. independents (202) 748-8002. we will be right back. >> weakens bring new book to be featuring authors and their nonfiction books. former governor nikki haley shares her book. she talks about the women she has drawn inspiration from. chris miller traces t history

of microchip technology and how it has become the most critically needed technology globally. he is interviewed by a congressman. watch book tv every weekend on c-span two. you can watch online anytime at book tv.org. tonight on q&a, a poet discusses his book, he details the story of his migration from el salvador to the u.s. at age nine. >> if i did my job, you will now have a face, name, at least one.

you as the reader know personally. they don't talk about what they've lived through. now here is one that is sharing this journey with you. now, hopefully, you have more empathy. >> tonight at 8:00 eastern on q&a. you can listen to our podcasts on our free c-span now app. >> live sunday on in-depth, chris hedges will be our guest to talk about political revolution, war, incarceration era. the books include america,

upper-class, trauma and transformation, the greatest people. join in the conversation with yourhone calls. -dth with chris hedges, live sunday january 1 at noon stern. >> washington journal continues. host: welcome back to washington journal. we are talking about the question does religion unite or five. we want to know what are your thoughts of religion and politics, how religion influences your politics and whether you believe there should be more or less religion in politics. we want you to start calling and now. (202) 748-8001 republicans. (202) 748-8000 democrats.

independents (202) 748-8002. before we get to your calls, i want to go back to a conversation i had earlier this morning with clifford young, the public affairs president for polling, talking about recent polling they've done on this topic. there was polling on this topic of religion and politics. can you tell us, how do americans feel about the role of spirituality and religion? guest: what we brought you today is a couple of polls. we want to get at the root issue of religion and division. the holiday season is a time when we come together with family and friends. we sit at the dinner table. as of lately, that is difficult,

having those discussions about politics. it doesn't matter how you asked the question. political divisiveness is one of the primary concerns in america today. our poll showed that 79% of americans are worried about that. that division, that polarization, those issues are key today. they are kind of tearing america part. we want to ask the question, can there be something we do about it? what did we find? we can riff from there. on the one hand, americans do believe there is common ground. two thirds of americans leave it is over emphasized by the media and politicians, the division. americans have more in common than they don't. it's a question of how you

operationalize it, how you wracked with other people. how? at the highest level, americans understand that other americans are fundamentally good. given the chance, they will do the right thing. they will improve their relationships with other people. two thirds of americans think that. two thirds also think that politicians have to do their obligation in tamping down the rhetoric. tamping down the divisiveness. that is poisonous. a lot of faith, americans have faith in other americans. they think the political class needs to be more responsive. what is the role of religion on

that? i would say there are two sides to the same coin. there is a double-edged sword here. on one hand, americans really see the role of religion and spirituality in bringing people together and being the better self, that's important. on the other hand, they are skeptical. there is a degree of skepticism about how it is deployed in politics. the author is unsure about how effective it really is. we can go into more detail. host: as you mentioned, the poll is wide reaching. one thing i want to bring up is 58% of respondents said -- 66%

said politicians should put aside their differences and compromise. that is the second line in this chart i am showing. 66% said they agreed more with the fact the politician should put aside their differences and compromise and the remaining 34% said they agree with the statement politicians should fight for what is right without compromise. can you break that down a little bit? two thirds say they should do more compromising. that means one third of people feel like your views should be so set that you are unwilling to compromise. >> that says it all. independent of the polls, we look at the data. there is a lot of common ground in america. americans have a lot in common.

it is always that minority. that drives things. in primaries, they determine most of the primaries. i think that's what we see in this poll. a vast majority of americans really can see the better nature of our angels. there is always that strong minority that says it's not about compromise, it's about doing it our way and pushing that forward. host: when you ask about being friends with someone who doesn't share your same political views. 55% said it's not that difficult. 75% said they can learn by talking to people with different views. why do so many people say that but it doesn't appear it's

actually done it? guest: that's the difference between theory and practice. we can all agree in theory it's better to interact with those who are different to understand them better. in practice, a lot of americans are spatially segregate it. we live in our doubles that are very distinct. that inhibits our interactions, our ability to understand the other. a lot of our polling shows that very distinctly. in theory, we want to get along. in practice, we have little chance to do that. host: when it talked about whether religion should be a big part of politics, that wasn't what was polled as most

effective in making spiritual values bigger. that was less effective it reducing divisiveness. can you talk about what respondent did say? guest: on the one hand, a majority of accuracy an important role in bringing us together. it varies a little bit dependent how we ask the question. how effective is it really? when we rank order it, it ranks lower. the number one way to come together, to incentivize consensus is actually bringing more voice to people.

how do you interpret that? making sure voices are heard. whether you are on the right left, your voices heard. that's the number one way to bring people together. how would one do that? we can see it in a very simple sense. maybe in school or at religious houses, churches and synagogues. those of the top two ways to bring people together. only plurality dependent how you asked the question believe religious values could do the same. it's not that it is in a

solution, it's not the top of mind solution in americans minds. host: i want to shift for the last few minutes. there was a different kind of poll similar to what you published. it was about the real meaning of christmas and there were some fun questions as well. it looks at how people think the real eating of christmas is being forgotten. 42% said they agree that most americans have forgotten the real meaning of christmas. 10% said they somewhat disagree. again, the real meaning of christmas, there were a lot of americans who see it. guest: i think that goes with the times. there is a degree of skepticism

about where we are as a nation. i think the question reflects that. what do people mean by that? the meaning can vary a bit. it can be is can create as the day that jesus was born, a very important religious date for monotheistic religions. it could mean something rotter and more conceptual. whatever the specific meaning people give, there is a sense that we are not there unified as a people. that's how i would read it? host: that was on the chart. that poll also asked about taking down holiday decorations. 41% said they start takin

decorations down the first d of january. 48 peraid the latest is the first weekf january. 23% said they should take down decoraby late july. if you have them up, when do you normally take them down? guest: my neighbor never does. in the young household, we take them down the first of january. host: the most annoying or overplayed christmas song. that was also part of the pole. it asked people if they felt there were certain songs that were overplayed. of those who voted and could come up with a song, mariah carey's all i want for christmas is you, 12% said that was the most annoying song.

6% said jingle bells. 4%, all christmas songs. i thought that was a fun way, a fun polling questions you had. what else did you learn about the conditions -- traditions? guest: we have behaviors where we come together every year and interact with family and friends. that's the most important thing. we asked another question on santa claus. how many adults still believe in santa claus? 21% of adults said they still leave in santa claus. i don't know if it is specifically santa claus or the spirit of christmas. that's a big chunk of adults that were waiting up last night

for their presence. host: the christmas spirit lives on in adults. thank you so much clifford young. we appreciate you joining us this morning. host: that was some of our discussion from earlier today. now, we want to hear from you. does religion unite or divide? let's hear from felix in north carolina. you are on. caller: good morning. how are you this wonderful day? host: what are your thoughts? caller: please bear with me. i will be 70 years old. i've got three pieces of food

for thought. where can i find a political exception to the ninth commandment of bearing false witness? we should follow the philosophy attributed to st. francis of assisi, everywhere i go, i preach the gospel. sometimes i even use words. practice what you preach, don't preach what you want other people to practice. thirdly, there is nothing so important is humans. we will manipulate it to our profit and power. i pray that everyone has a merry christmas and a joyous new year. god bless america. godspeed to all. have a great day. thank you. host: let's go to sean in

lakeland, florida. what are your thoughts? caller: for me, i would say there are older 2000 religions in the world. if i would say something good, it gives people something to believe in and a way to focus in life. that said it, the problem is of those 2000 religions, a great majority feel it's the only one that's right. you have a problem of religion by design. the problem is people that are religious, they don't realize that all religions have spirituality in common. it's a personal thing. when something spiritual happens to them, they attribute that to religion instead of spirituality.

you can't tell me my god isn't real because god did such and such for me. regardless of what your religion tells you, man has come up with all of these different religions to use that to divide people. that's what it was designed to do. host: our next caller is tony in texas. good morning, tony. caller: good morning. this religion story is a lot like race. people have their own beliefs. the real truth is there is one common thread between every single one of us. the majority of people get lost in their bias. does it divide us or not?

i think it has the power to keep us together. there is a good example of that. the former president had the abraham accords, ringing israel and the arabic states together. they recognized the common thread is religion. host: let's go to ken in st. louis, missouri. you are on. caller: happy holidays to you. great show. religion by its nature and origin divides us. it makes us exert as a species. you can look back at its origin.

as the canaanites if it divides us. ask the holocaust victims. liquids going on today. look at the middle east. we are a tribal species. it was a survival mode. now, we realize i don't have to be afraid if somebody is a different color. if they have different views than me. by its very nature, it divides us. you were saying i have the answer to the universe. no one does. there are no gods. we have to figure it out and work together.

happy holidays to all. host: this is charles from maryland on the independent line. go ahead. caller: good morning and thank you for taking my call. let me say that religion is a great thing. most of us have a common interpretation. religion has been used particularly by christianity as a two by four to reinforce our own internal prejudice and all kinds of thing. let me give you a quick example. i have to thank for many years ago putting this on air.

a lady called in from some area of the country. she was speaking to interviewers who happen to be african american. they were talking about the race issue. she quoted a chapter from the bible. there were at the church of antioch certain teachers and scholars named barnabas and simeon. they were called niger. she stretched that to make that the n-word.

we are just going to go on to another color. host: robert is in tucson arizona. what are your comments? caller: thank you for taking the call. thank you for the topic. religion is a path to spiritual elevation. it's the ability to balance yourself to a full understanding of ourselves. the old testament, the laws fulfilled through the daily expression in the emotion of love. it doesn't matter if you believe in religion. it's important to operate and love. the bible says god is love and the people who do not know love don't know god. there is so much confusion.

there will be a submission of religion. we will gather ourselves together. we have to set what was wrong. this country has a spiritual destiny. they turn to religion or spirituality to improve ourselves. some of us want to help other people. we can see the confusion in the world. it's possible. that's what it's all about. it is a path to spiritual is asian. some of us have the ability to turn a switch in our head and go away from the hate and anger. it is possible to be done. that is the point of religion.

i studied all religion. it's very unfortunate that so few christians really understand the message of christianity. it is to turn people to understand love and be loving people. that fulfills everything. that was jesus's message. thank you very much for all you do. it's a very simple message. host: we appreciate your call. we are going to move on. i want to bring up some of the text messages and social media posts we he received.

we want your calls. republicans call us at (202) 748-8000. democrats call us at (202) 748-8001. independents (202) 748-8002.

let's hear now from gregory in nashville on the independent line. go ahead. caller: hello. if we really want to celebrate this holiday season, we need to do it as the romans did. we should dance naked. host: ok. on the democratic line is ob calling from wisconsin. go ahead. caller: thank you for taking my call. i believe religion is divisive. there have been so many wars over it. there has been so much problems with it. it is divisive. there is one party that is more divisive than any. that's a real problem in america nowadays.

when they have so much hatred towards others, it's hard to live that way. thank you for taking michael. host: let's go to diane in arkansas. what are your thoughts? caller: good morning. i think we should tell the truth in love. i think we should meet people where they are. the truth does divide. host: does religion influence your politics? caller: definitely. i've been bought with a price. i do not own myself.

the only thing that -- if it's the opposite of his word, i cannot align myself with it. host: we appreciate your call this morning. let's talk to tony. he is on the and dependent line from arkansas. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. jesus came to unitas, to bring us together. why do you have three numbers up there? that is dividing each one of us individually. this is his day of celebrating his birthday.

host: let's go now to the republican alignment. on the line is randy in virginia. go ahead. caller: thanks for taking my call. i believe that if you are a true christian, you know there is also a devil. i have a question to the democrats who believe in the killing of babies. which one is more liable? there is no religion that believes in homosexuality for the killing of babies. that is a demonic trait. host: on the line now from

monroe, new york, jerry. go ahead. caller: happy holidays. jesus christ was the closest thing we have to god. god never spoke to us, but jesus loved us. jesus was a man of color. he wasn't black, he was brown it. he was from the original people, religion messed up god and all that stuff. just love each other. we are going to destroy each other. host: let's go now to john calling from pennsylvania on the

independent line. caller: i think religion definitely can divide if people allow it. it's not so much the religion, it's more the individual. how they feel when they interpret the scripture. it's not religion itself. you can have good christians that follow good practices. you can have good muslims that follow good practices. money divides us. money used to be a thing. it should be a thing where you give as a gesture. it's like a gift or a way of training. it's been taken advantage of to the point where it has

diminished its value. it's like monopoly money. it's not religion. religion can be good and hold people together. that's all i have. thanks for letting me share. host: let's go now to ryan on the democratic line in ohio. caller: happy holidays and thanks to say something on your show. host: go right ahead. caller: as far as religion, it can be a good thing if it is used correctly. i have seen over the years religion itself has divided humanity. i'm not condemning it. i think we need to get control of how it's being used

politically as a weapon. also in the form of how to subjugate people. hopefully, humanity will find some balance between religion and spirituality versus how it's being used politically in a corporate setting. it's pretty much all i have to say about that. host: let's go now to california. drew is on the independent line. caller: it's kind of interesting. the last three people reiterated

what i wanted to say. one of the things i realize is it's both. it can bring us all together. it can divide us. we have that power. we have the ability to do that. it is up to us. that's the good news. we have that ability to be able to make that decision. hopefully we will make the right decision. host: do you think there should be more or less religion in public life? caller: because religion is a good thing, i think we need more of it. it really helps steer people in the right direction in terms of being a good person.

that's an important thing we need to teach our kids. we need to teach them integrity. i think it's very important. host: we appreciate your call this morning. on the line now, new york. caller: to clarify, everyone is saying the same thing over and over. i think the government and religion should merge. that's just my opinion. merry christmas. host: let's hear now from rachel. rachel is calling on the independent line from texas. caller: hello. i have voted for democrats and republicans. i am considered independent. they told me it now you are

republican. this bit about if you are a democrat you don't own guns, you don't believe in god, all of this craziness i hear, i am 66 years old. we are all one nation under god. this crazy stuff is tearing people apart. abortion was passed by the supreme court justice, they were republicans. thank you. host: our next caller is richard on the line forum -- line from missouri. what are your thoughts this morning? caller: my parents, we had to go to sunday school and all this.

i am 85 years old right now. looking back, i think religion is a con game. it's a way to keep people in power. what kind of religion would kill somebody because they've got a rag over their head. that's not believable. unfortunately, religion has gotten to be a division. the guy that killed those people in south america, he was a religious person. you've got to make up your own mind. pt barnum said there is a sucker born every minute. do what you want to do. host: we are going to get to more of your calls.

there was recent polling. they were looking on the connection between religion and government. 73% of respondents said religion should be kept separate from government policy. 30% said public school teachers should be allowed to lead a class in prayer. 39% said cities and towns should be allowed to put religious symbols on public property. it 70% want churches and other houses of worship to stay out of politics. i've got a little bit more pulled up. 73% said religion should be separate from government policy. it varies when you break it down by race. government policy should support

religious values and beliefs, that was 35% of black voters. there was also a partisan divide. 38% of republicans or people who said they lean republican said government policies should support religious values and beliefs. that's compared to 16% that were democratic. there was a big religious divide with 49% of people said government policy should support ledges values and beliefs. they were split compared to white nonevangelicals. only 25% government policy should support religious values and beliefs.

70 3% of white nonevangelicals said they should not. we are talking to you today about whether religion unites or divides us. let's go now to tennessee on the republican line. what are your thoughts? caller: thank you for taking my call. merry christmas to everyone. the word religion is a complex word. all that we can really go with his what jesus said. jesus said i am the way, the

truth, i am the life. that's a pretty singular viewpoint. he said i am the resurrection. the bible teaches that the lord says there is one mediator between god and man. the word religion throws every philosophy into society. we need to concentrate on the bible and what jesus taught. i appreciate the viewpoint. host: i wanted to ask you, how important is religion when you're deciding who to support on election day? caller: very good question.

thank you for asking. the bible teaches that god created man and woman and he brought her to the man and they became one flesh. i am very adamant on marriage between a male and a female. i believe that life begins at conception. i am antiabortion. when it comes to morality, i do believe you've got the 10 commandments. we don't the atrocities that are put upon humanity today by other

religious groups. when it comes to my political viewpoint, if they line up as close as they can and none of them are perfect, i like for them to line up with the scriptures. that is how i vote. host: we appreciate your call this morning. i want to bring up some of the responses we are receiving on social media.

host: let's go now to. james is on the independent line. what are your thoughts? caller: i would like to say thank you for accepting my phone call. very christmas to all. i believe it does not divide our country. i believe there is a time where you get gifts and celebrate the joy and love.

that's about it. religion is important. it does not divide. thank you for answering my phone call. host: we have lewis in north carolina. what are your thoughts? caller: merry christmas. i believe we have to take the lying out of christmas. we lie to our children about santa claus. we lie to our children about the trinity where the three wise men -- we need to stop lying to the people and maybe they would get a better understanding. if they take the word of god

that they say they believe in. the scripture tells us when the three wise men met jesus, he wasn't in a manger. he was a little boy. they gave him the things they needed to give him. those three magi, they were foreigners. america doesn't like foreigners. they came from these three countries we know today. one is iran, the other is iraq, then you've got one from yemen. america and other countries are after these countries. the truth must be told. host: we are going to move on now to shane in las vegas. what are your thoughts? caller: thank you for taking my

call. i work in the ministry. i do believe that religion can't be dividing. look at christianity itself. there are over 30,000 different denominations of christians. each one interprets the bible differently. there are things that i don't believe that the catholics believe. there are things the methodists believe that i don't believe. there is so much belief. when you start to view all christians as one homogenous group, it's not necessarily true. one of the things i think that is important to understand as the bible says there is no marriage in heaven. some people take that, that's

the hill they are going to die on. christianity itself is divided in the polarization of views that it has about interpreting the word of god. host: let's hear it now from kayla in california. go ahead. caller: thanks for taking my call. i am college educated. i'm extremely open-minded. one week ago, i was among the people who believe that religion controls the masses. jesus is real. jesus is love.

love unites. love is the answer. love heals it. love only generates from one source. host: you've had this religious awakening in the last week, how might it impact your political outlook? caller: i am going to go with love when i vote. we live in the devils world. you are talking about whites and blacks. that's where the divide is at. that is stuff that shouldn't matter. i don't know why the news is re-porting on that.

the divide is the media. it is not religion. that is the divide. why are we talking about blacks and whites? does that matter? we bleed red. host: i appreciate your call. let's go to georgia. what are your thoughts? caller: i am a registered democrat. there really isn't a divide. worldwide, the torah is with

jews, the koran with muslims. nowhere in the gospels jesus say i am god. he didn't say worship me. no profit declared that they were god. we are all connected. we all worship one god. host: as a muslim, how does your religion impact your politics? caller: it does not. republicans are pretty stern. they have their own philosophy. the democratic weight tends to

be the middle grain. follow the middle road. host: i appreciate your call. let's hear from richard in nashville. what are your thoughts? caller: i am kind of torn. it can divide. it can also bring us together. i remember someone asking me years ago, who brought you to religion? in my case, it is jesus christ. they said who brought you to god? who introduced you? it has weighed on my mind for many years. god brought me to him. he said he had every hair on my head numbered.

if that's the case, i respect other beliefs, i respect the fact that others may. you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him weak -- drink. if i show love, i don't care what color you are or where you come from. if you show love to that individual, sooner or later you will win them over. if you look at the way this country was formed, we came here and set this up. you notice that we have catholics, we have methodist, we have baptist, we have a lot of different religions. they didn't want ruling class of

one religion. host: alright. that is going to do it for today. we will be back tomorrow morning at 7:00 eastern. we appreciate you for joining us. have a great day. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government, funded by these television companies and more, including cox. >> we are providing lower income students access to affordable internet so homework can just be

homework. cox connect to compete. >> cox supports c-an as a public service, along with these other television providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy. >> the new 118 congress convenes on tuesday, january 1 at noon eastern, returning as a divided government. republicans will control the house of representatives while democrats remain control by slim majority of the congress. the new congress will be more diverse, with a record number of women serving, including more women of color. join as the congress gavels into session. new congress, new leaders. watch the opening day of the 118th congress tuesday, january

3 at noon eastern, live on c-span and c-span2 and also on c-span now, our free mobile app or online at c-span.org. >> are you a nonfiction book lover looking for a new podcast? tune into one of the many podcasts c-span has to offer. on q&a, interesting authors interviews. learn something new on book notes plus through conversations with nonfiction authors and historians. authors brings together authors with interviewers for our long conversations. and on about book, we talk about books with news and industry with all of our podcasts. download the free c-span mobile app wherever you get you