MAGA Christians' Hypocrisy: The Dark Side of Vertical Morality Unveiled

The hypocrisy of MAGA Christians is staggering. They profess faith in Jesus, who preached love and mercy, yet support policies that punish immigrants and demonize LGBTQ individuals.

This contradiction stems from a concept known as “vertical morality.”

Vertical morality measures righteousness not by kindness to others but by adherence to authority. Christian advocates and former fundamentalists explain how this framework shapes today’s political landscape.

Tia Levings, a former Christian fundamentalist, describes vertical morality as the belief that authority and moral codes come from an external superior. In religion, that superior is God; in politics, it could be an authoritarian leader.

April Ajoy, another advocate, elaborates that vertical morality dictates that ethics are about pleasing God alone. Morals are derived from God’s will, regardless of the consequences for others.

This term gained traction through social media, particularly from activist Rachel Klinger Cain. She simplifies complex ideas, explaining that vertical morality equates to divine command theory, where morality is dictated by an authority above.

In contrast, horizontal morality prioritizes the well-being of others. Ajoy states that this approach focuses on minimizing harm to those around us, acting out of genuine empathy rather than obligation to a higher power.

Levings notes that many Christians today prioritize vertical morality over horizontal, neglecting the latter's importance in their faith.

Ajoy argues that the most Christ-like approach involves horizontal authority, aligning with vertical morality. She cites Matthew 25, where Jesus equates loving neighbors with loving Him.

This distinction is not mere theological debate; it has significant implications for contemporary politics.

Ajoy points out that evangelicals believe true goodness comes from obeying God, even if it harms others. This belief can be dangerous when weaponized for power, as seen in the rise of Christian nationalism during the Trump administration.

Conservative Christian nationalists view their political allies as righteous and their opponents as evil. Levings observes that today’s conservative Christianity is influenced more by Old Testament laws than by Jesus’ teachings.

She highlights theonomy, the belief that Old Testament laws should govern modern society, as a driving force behind Christian nationalist politics.

Klinger Cain references Abraham’s story to illustrate vertical morality's flaws. Abraham was praised for his willingness to sacrifice his son Isaac, despite the act's immorality. Under vertical morality, disobeying such commands is seen as sinful.

This mindset frames unquestioning obedience as virtuous, even when it contradicts compassion or common sense. The influence of conservative Christians on public policy has turned religious debates into cultural conflicts.

Ajoy criticizes MAGA Christians for promoting policies contrary to Jesus’ teachings. They justify their actions through a vengeful view of God, labeling immigrants as criminals and leftists as satanic without evidence.

Under vertical morality, disobeying God’s laws is the worst sin. Klinger Cain points to the harsh treatment of immigrant detainees as an example of this mindset. She questions why undocumented individuals face severe punishment when their actions often harm no one.

This religious perspective desensitizes individuals to inhumane treatment, making it seem justified. Klinger Cain argues that salvation is viewed not through good deeds but by aligning with the right political ideology.

Hale asserts that vertical morality has led white conservative Christians to abandon Christ’s core teachings in favor of self-interest and moral purity. They believe they remain faithful while excusing behaviors that contradict Christian values.

This system also demonizes empathy. Some conservative authors label empathy as sinful, arguing that it leads to moral compromise.

Klinger Cain illustrates this with the example of Abraham; had he empathized with Isaac, he would have sinned by choosing not to kill him. This mentality extends to parents being advised against accepting their LGBTQ children.

The simplicity of vertical morality appeals to many because it provides clear answers and reduces anxiety about moral dilemmas.

Klinger Cain notes that during times of cultural upheaval, people gravitate toward authoritarian structures out of fear and uncertainty.

She believes this explains why conservative Christians quickly rally behind morally questionable political actions while those on the left engage in more complex discussions.

Levings adds that vertical morality feels safe during chaotic times when confronting systemic issues seems overwhelming. Compliance often becomes a survival tactic in authoritarian systems.

Hale agrees that vertical morality simplifies faith measurement but risks blinding individuals to injustice and justifying harmful behavior. When personal righteousness overshadows collective responsibility, society suffers.

Ajoy warns that history shows Christians have caused suffering while believing they were obeying God. She cites slavery and KKK activities as examples of this manipulation of faith.

Ajoy emphasizes that vertical morality is currently weaponized in politics. If leaders can convince followers they are “of God,” they can harm others without consequence while maintaining a façade of righteousness.

Levings highlights the dangers of vertical morality's reliance on benevolent authority figures and its resistance to modern advancements or diverse perspectives.

While acknowledging some value in vertical morality, Hale insists it must coexist with horizontal ethics. Faith without action is incomplete; personal devotion must be rooted in love for others.