Calling “Godless Liberalism” a religion should be instantly recognized as an ideological attack rather than a neutral observation of facts. Sadly this is not the case and it has become far too common for critics of liberalism to claim that it’s inherently godless and religious, thus hoping to discredit liberal policies before they are even considered. Examining the characteristics which define religions as distinct from other types of belief systems reveals just how wrong such claims are.
The most common and fundamental characteristic of religions is the belief in supernatural beings — usually, but not always, including gods. Few religions lack this characteristic and most religions are founded upon it. Does Godless Liberalism involve belief in supernatural beings like gods? Obviously not, otherwise it wouldn’t be “godless.” Liberalism itself, which is not inherently godless, is compatible with belief in gods and most American liberals are not only theists, but Christians.
Differentiating between sacred and profane objects, places, and times helps religious believers focus on transcendental values and/or the existence of a supernatural realm. Many liberals, godless or not, probably have things, places, or times which they consider “sacred” in the sense that they are venerated in some way. Does liberalism itself involve such a distinction? No — it neither encourages nor discourages it. Some liberals will believe that some things are sacred and others won’t.
If people believe in something sacred, they probably have rituals associated with it which are also sacred. A liberal who holds something as “sacred” may engage in some sort of ritual or ceremony. As with the very existence of a category of “sacred” things, however, there is nothing about liberalism which either mandates such a belief or excludes it. Some liberals participate in rituals and some don’t; there are no liberal rituals, godless or otherwise.
Most religions preach a moral code which is typically based upon whatever transcendental and supernatural beliefs are fundamental to that religion. Thus, for example, theistic religions typically claim that morality is derived from the commands of their gods. Liberals have moral codes and most believe that those codes have supernatural origins, but this isn’t a “doctrine” of liberals nor is it inherent in liberalism. There certainly isn’t a single moral code inherent to “godless liberalism.”
Perhaps the vaguest characteristic of religion is the experience of “religious feelings” like awe, a sense of mystery, adoration, and even guilt. Religions encourage such feelings, especially in the presence of sacred objects and places, and the feelings are typically connected to the presence of the supernatural. Most liberals surely experience such feelings while others don’t. There is nothing about liberalism, godless or otherwise, which promotes them or relies upon them in any way.
Belief in supernatural beings like gods doesn’t get you very far if you can’t communicate with them, so religions which include such beliefs naturally also teach how to talk to them — usually with some form of prayer or other ritual. Most liberals believe in a god and therefore probably pray; other liberals don’t. Because there is nothing about liberalism, godless or not, which encourages or discourages belief in the supernatural, there is also nothing about it which deals with prayer.
Religions constitute entire worldviews and teach people how to structure their lives in relation to their worldview: how to relate to others, what to expect from social relationships, how to behave, etc. Liberals have worldviews, and there are common beliefs behind political liberalism in America, but liberalism itself doesn’t quite amount to a worldview. It can be a complex political philosophy, but there are liberals with very divergent worldviews as well. The same holds for godless liberals.
A few religious people follow their religions in isolated ways, but more often than not religions involve complex social organizations of believers who join each other for worship, rituals, prayer, etc. Liberals probably belong to a variety of groups, but not all the same groups. There are liberal political groups, obviously, but they are not bound together by all the above because none of the above is inherent in liberalism or even really a part of liberal political philosophy.
Liberalism is not inherently godless because there are plenty of religious, theistic, and Christian liberals. There is such a thing as “godless liberalism” because there are liberals who are godless. Neither liberalism generally not godless liberalism can qualify as a religion under even metaphorical definitions; they certainly don’t qualify under stricter, academic definitions like the one explored here. This is why criticisms of them as religions use ad hoc definitions made up solely for the purpose of attacking liberalism.
Ann Coulter is the most infamous example of this, defining religion as having: sacraments, holy scripture, martyrs, clergy, churches, doctrines of infallibility, and cosmology. Some of these characteristics are similar to those discussed above, and as explained above they actually reveal how liberalism is not a religion. Liberalism, godless or not, promotes no particular scripture, no cosmology, and has no sacraments. Other characteristics used by Coulter are not at all necessary for religion: martyrs, clergy, churches, or a doctrine of infallibility. Even if they were necessary for religion, they either don’t apply to liberalism and godless liberalism, or they don't apply to liberalism any more than to conservatism.
This claim is made to suggest that liberalism is hypocritical: liberals usually try to keep civil and religious power separated and believe that there should exist civil institutions outside the control of ecclesiastical authorities. If liberalism is a religion, however, their secular institutions are religious and supporters of liberalism are just substituting their religion for traditional Christianity. The adjective “godless” is added to smear liberals so that their arguments can be dismissed without further consideration.
Calling liberalism godless or a religion misrepresents both in a manner that hinders debates, decreases knowledge, and prevents people from engaging in substantive discussions about serious issues.
