By Dave Britton
Reader Contributor
The Bonner County Republican Central Committee met April 21 for its final meeting of the current legislative season. The main topic was a discussion of differing opinions about the voter guide mailed out with the committee’s endorsements of specific candidates for the Republican primary.
The public comments, as well as comments by precinct committeemen, included both that community members found the voter guide very offensive, and others thought it was very helpful.
What I think is that the voter guide contained a lot of rhetoric signaling that these endorsements indicated that the candidates agreed with the committee’s majority ideology, which was expressed explicitly in a resolution passed after Turning Point USA leader Charlie Kirk was assassinated. (Available at bonnergop.org/resolution-honoring-charlie-kirk-as-a-martyr).
The resolution states: “[T]he BCRCC commits to follow Charlie Kirk’s example by boldly, courageously and respectfully contending for a conservative, Republican and biblical worldview in politics and civic engagement.”
The word “biblical” was an amendment to the original version, after I protested the initial phrasing of “Christian worldview” as a violation of the First Amendment’s injunction that, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
This overtly political context of an action taken by elected political representatives to assert political allegiance to an explicitly Christian religious ideology is characteristic of the political position contemporary analysts refer to as “Christian nationalism.”
I used the agenda item of “P.C. reports” to report that I had publicly appeared in a recent Bonner County Human Rights Task Force presentation by local church pastors about Christian nationalism; and, as a P.C. as well as a Quaker, I spoke against the BCRCC’s adoption of Christian nationalist rhetoric. I attributed the considerable negative community reaction to the voting guide publication due to its Christian nationalist orientation.
My sense is that many Republicans do not agree with Christian nationalism and actually find it offensive when the Christian nationalists claim this makes them “not real Republicans.” The voting guide triggered that negativity, I asserted. I noted that the First Amendment establishes formal separation of church and state, so actual “real” Republicans would not like dog whistles to Christian nationalism in the voting guide.
Then all hell broke loose (metaphorically, not Biblically), and even pro tem Chairman Scott Herndon could or would not rescue me from the outpouring of outrage. Several precinct committeemen called out that the Constitution did not call for separation of church and state, and that “churches need to be involved,” as P.C. and Bonner County Commissioner Ron Korn put it.
I had not, prior to this, experienced or realized the intensity or depth of emotional engagement this issue created.
Fellow P.C. Tom “Butch” Horton enlightened me, and I thank him for the insight. For these angry committee members he said, “Christian nationalist” is an epithet — a derogatory insult like “racist” or “antisemite.”
I was unaware, or ignorant, of the “othering” effect I caused by using the term. I thought it was a technical term for a category of political and religious orientation — one among many, not an insult, just a label for a collection of beliefs (and actually a vague one with many varieties), as we had discussed in the pastors’ human rights presentation. Now I have been schooled, and I find I need to think carefully about how to talk about mixing religion and politics.
For more detailed information about my views on this topic (and others) you can read my analysis of the current Republican Party platform at bonnergop.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Britton_platform_response.pdf.
Dave Britton serves as Beach Precinct committeeman for the Bonner County Republican Central Committee.
