Humanism Now
Welcome to Humanism Now, the weekly podcast from Humanise Live. Tune in for the latest news, insightful worldwide guest interviews, and lively discussions on the most pressing questions of our time — all from a naturalistic, empathetic, and rationalist world view that marks out humanism. Join us as we explore ethical dilemmas, dissect current events, and engage in thoughtful conversations that matter.
Humanism Now
31. Katherine Stewart on Money, Lies & God: How Billionaires Weaponised Religion to Undermine Democracy
The pro-life religion we see today is a modern creation. It was created for political purposes." — Katherine Stewart
Katherine Stewart is an award-winning journalist and author, who has investigated the rise of religious nationalism and its impact on democracy for over 15 years. Her work appears in The New York Times and The New Republic. She is the author of The Good News Club, The Power Worshippers, and the new release Money, Lies, and God.
Key Topics Covered
- How the "Good News Club" exposed the stealth strategies of religious nationalists.
- The roots of Christian nationalism and its alliance with billionaires.
- Why abortion became a political weapon, not a religious crusade.
- How authoritarian leaders use religion to shield power globally.
- What gives hope — and how to fight back against democratic erosion.
Follow Katherine Stewart
- Website
- The Power Worshippers
- The Good News Club
- Money, Lies, and God (Pre-order now)
- Bluesky Social
- Twitter/X
Resources Mentioned
- Christians Against Christian Nationalism
- Vote Common Good
- God & Country documentary (based on The Power Worshippers)
🙏 Support Humanism Now!
Love what we do? Become a sponsor or supporter via Patreon and help us keep bringing thoughtful conversations to life. Every pledge helps.
Support us on Patreon
Advertising opportunities
Click here to submit questions, nominate guest & topics.
Follow Humanism Now @HumanismNowPod
Humanism Now is produced by Humanise Live
Contact us at hello@humanise.live
Welcome to the Humanism Now podcast. I'm your host, james Hodgson. Catherine Stewart is an award-winning journalist and author who writes about the intersection of faith and politics, policy and education and the threat to democratic institutions. Catherine has been covering religious nationalism and the assault on American democracy for over 15 years. Her work has appeared in the New York Times and the New Republic. In her latest book, money Lies in God, catherine delves into how religious nationalism is reshaping democracy and politics, exploring its goals and global implications. Catherine's previous work, the Power Worshippers, was awarded first place for excellence in non-fiction books by the Religious News Association and was adapted into the documentary God and Country. Her first book, the Good News Club, covered the religious rights efforts to infiltrate and undermine public education. In 2024, catherine was awarded the Free Thought Heroine Award from the Freedom of Religion Foundation. Catherine Stewart, thank you so much for joining us on Humanism Now.
Speaker 2:Thank you so much for joining us on Humanism Now.
Speaker 1:Thank you so much for having me, so it's quite an impressive list of work and publications that you've written around this topic of the, I guess, the separation of church and state, but also the rise of religious nationalism, particularly in the US. In the US, I'm interested to know when you first began to suspect that faith was being used as a threat to democratic institutions and what drew you to this area of research.
Speaker 2:I first got interested in this topic 16 years ago when a program of fundamentalist religious indoctrination called a good news club forced its way into our daughter's public elementary school. Public schools are state schools in the United States and we do have a constitutional principle of separation of church and state. So faith schools you know we have plenty of faith schools but they're not supposed to be funded by the government. The state schools are meant to be non-sectarian, neither denigrating nor promoting any particular form of religion. But this program I discovered was really confusing little children into believing that their school endorsed this particular form of religion. And then they were using that misperception among children as young as five and six years old who are attending the clubs. They would instruct them specifically to try to recruit their peers to the club and a lot of the kids who were attending the clubs would approach their, say, non-christian peers or peers who were perhaps Catholic or the wrong kind of Christian and say I know this must be true because they taught it to me in school. State schools have a kind of cloak of authority in the minds of children. So I was really shocked to discover that the people who ran this club it's called the Goodness Club. They were calling our public schools their mission fields. They were calling other people's children the harvest, and I couldn't help but wonder what are they really after? So I followed that thread.
Speaker 2:I found the topic was much bigger than I imagined. The important thing that I've observed over time is how much that movement has really evolved. I discovered that these initiatives were national initiatives. There were thousands of these clubs in our state schools, but they were just one small part of a much larger attack on state education as a non-sectarian institution, and the attack on state education was just one small part of a much broader attack on the foundations of a modern secular democracy. So what I discovered over time is that the core ideology hasn't changed. It's been 16 years now since I started researching this, but the appeal and strategy has really broadened to a massive degree and its influence on one of America's two major political parties is now indisputable. It's really taken over, and what we're seeing now with the incoming Trump administration is just the infusion of religious nationalism or Christian nationalism in many areas of government.
Speaker 1:And how far back does the Christian nationalist movement go and who are the key players in its foundation or developing it to the prominence it's at now?
Speaker 2:The roots run very deep through multiple periods of history, but this movement as it exists in contemporary form really got its start in the late 1970s, early 1980s, with the rise of a movement called the New Right. Members of this group were really upset about changes in American society, including racial integration. They were really upset about the civil rights movement, desegregation, the women's rights movement, a sort of nascent gay rights movement, et cetera, and they also felt that the Republican Party itself, which was typically the conservative party, had become too liberal and too soft on communism. They were really affected by Cold War politics. They also felt that American religion was frankly becoming too moderate because of the rise of certain sort of moderate theologians and they started to meet and talk about how they could turn the situation around. And there's, frankly, a fascinating episode where they got together basically went down a laundry list of the issues that they thought could unite their new movement. So we're talking like 1980 or so. This is about seven years after the passage of Roe versus Wade, which legalized and liberalized abortion law.
Speaker 2:So number one was the fear that private religious schools, many of which were run by these very reactionary preachers and they were racially segregated. Some of them had actually called segregation scriptural. They said it's God's established order. But the tax authorities in the United States were looking at these racially segregated schools and thinking why are we giving you tax privileges? And this was outrageous to them. They thought we don't want to be taxed for our segregation, our racial segregation. That really was a huge, animating issue for some of the preachers who were part of this coalition. Another big issue for them was the women's rights movement. It was appalling that women were stepping out of their lane. But there were several other issues on the list School prayer, the absence of school prayer. But they had ultra conservative Catholic collaborators and the issue of school prayer tended to upset them because of a sort of history of Catholic-Protestant clashes around the issues of school prayer. They went down these issues one by one, but they came to the issue of abortion, which was hardly at the top of their list, and it was like a light bulb went off. They were like, huh, that could possibly work, because it touched on a range of anxieties, including anxieties about gender and even anxieties about race, the idea that the supposedly wrong kind of Americans were procreating and, as they might think, changing the construction, as it were, of America. So conservative-leaning Americans over time have really been persuaded that abortion is the single most important issue when it comes to their vote. Leaders of this movement know very well if you can get people to vote on a single issue or one or two issues, you can control their vote. So that is really how they coalesce their movement. It's how they message to the rank and file.
Speaker 2:It really took a long time to get the Republican Party to become anti-abortion. I mean when Roe versus Wade had passed the Southern Baptist Convention actually hailed the decision as a sensible middle ground that Barry Goldwater, a great conservative hero, supported abortion law liberalization, at least early in his career. Many Protestant Republicans felt like this sort of conformed to Protestant middle-class values the idea of choosing when and if to become pregnant. But over time these pro-choice voices were really purged from the Republican Party and now the Republican Party is entirely A to Z. They call themselves a party of life, but it's almost like the theology had to change. So the pro-life religion that we see today. It's a modern creation. It was created for political purposes.
Speaker 1:I think that's the really fascinating strand that you draw out in the book, and I know you came to give us a talk at the London Humanists as well, and I think that was the thing that stood out for me the most the idea that this is really not that much about humanity, the religious side at all. It's a political movement which uses religion as a tool.
Speaker 2:Absolutely, and I think a lot of people who are convinced that abortion is the greatest moral issue of our time are really not aware of the sort of history of it. This activist that you may have heard of named Phyllis Schlafly. She was part of that New Right. She wrote a book called how the Republican Party Became Pro-Life, and what it shows is that here is one of these key anti-abortion activists who actually wrote a book about how hard it was to purge those pro-choice voices and really get this party to unite around this single issue so they can use it as a sort of voter turnout tool. But you should be aware that there is also a nascent anti-abortion movement here in the UK and they're also relying on some US-based organizations for key parts of their support.
Speaker 1:Yeah, I'd love to come on actually to some of the global implications of this. As you say, once it may have started in America, how it's spreading around the world, but I'm interested as well in terms of how is Christian nationalism perceived amongst the wider Christian population in America?
Speaker 2:Presumably they don't speak for all Christians in what is predominantly a Christian country their religion and I think the way many, if not most, american Christians understand their faith has to do with social justice, loving their neighbor, caring for the least of these. The way I do a lot of my research is I go to right-wing conferences and strategy gatherings and last December I went to this gathering in Phoenix, arizona, called America Fest. It's sponsored by Turning Point USA, which is one of the most politically engaged organizations. They have a big voter turnout component and one of the speakers there he's the head of Turning Point Faith, which is their faith outreach arm. His name is Lucas Miles.
Speaker 2:He wrote a book. I mean his whole thing is about how terrible. He calls it woke. Jesus is heresy, destroying the American church. And he actually literally took aim at the social gospel and he said the historical Jesus movement and liberation theology and black liberation theology. And he said he and some 3,500 other pastors are forming what he called a new Nicene Creter Council. He was referring to the 4th century entity that sort of fixed some of the key doctrines of Christianity and he said we need to decide, paraphrasing here, which Jesus is the right Jesus, acknowledging that he's talking about wokeism from the pulpit. We need to eradicate wokeism from the pulpit. What does wokeism mean? It's anything having to do with empathy. It has having to do with the social gospel, which is, of course, a key feature of Christianity in America and among many American Christians and also among many Christians around the world. So I just think it's fascinating that some of the most poisonous words are reserved for Christians who happen to adhere to a different version of religion.
Speaker 2:And there are many progressive and moderate and liberal pastors who are speaking out against this. I think of groups like the Baptist Joint Committee and Christians Against Christian Nationalism or Vote Common Good, the New Evangelicals. There are so many, but these are not equivalent movements the sort of moderate and progressive Christian voices that are speaking out against the weaponization of their faith for politics and power. Don't have the money, don't have the organization. They just don't have the money. Don't have the organization, they just don't have the political infrastructure.
Speaker 2:Because the Christian nationalist movement in America is a leadership-driven and an organization-driven movement. It is incredibly well-funded. It has formed alliances with a sector of the plutocratic class that wants just bear with me for a minute they want low taxes for the rich, they want minimal regulations of business, they say that they are pro-capitalist and they want free markets, but they're also seeking, in many instances, not only protections for their monopolistic businesses, but also taxpayer subsidies in some cases. So they want policies that are going to justify and increase their wealth at the very top. And, by the way, these funders, they're not all one type. Some of them are Protestant, some are evangelical, some are Catholic, some are Jewish, some are atheist Religiously they're all over the place, but they want this economic agenda enacted.
Speaker 2:And how do they get the little people right the rank and file, to vote for this agenda that is actually eroding rights for the workforce and making life more difficult for them, making life more expensive for them, more difficult for their families? They do it through this sort of identitarian religious movement. So they're funding these billionaires, they're funding initiatives that are promoting this abortion stuff, this anti-woke stuff, this sort of stuff about sort of trans panic stuff, which affects very few people. But they talk about it constantly as though there is nothing else more important. And you get people voting on those kinds of identity issues. Then they're not paying attention to the fact that the system is actually not benefiting them. This is a movement that claims to stand for the American family, but what they're doing is driving support for politicians whose policies are actually making it so much harder for so many American families to succeed.
Speaker 1:It's fascinating, yeah, and there's so many strands to this as well, and it sounds like from what you've explained there, that there's lots of contradictions in what this movement wants compared to what I guess we would traditionally think of the teachings of the Bible and Jesus, particularly around taxes and also just on the founding principles of the US, if we talk about freedom of belief. How do they justify these contradictions or how do they make them seem aligned to a Christian movement?
Speaker 2:I think to an important extent they are in league with one another. They're rowing in the same boat, as it were. They all work together to get Trump elected. They work together to hollow out the Republican Party and eliminate other guardrails that are supposed to protect our democracy. They are the anti-democratic movement and just because they have different interests and ideas and say might not necessarily get along very well at a party, it doesn't mean they're not all contributing to the movement in important ways. But can they stay together? That's a really good question. In a certain sense, now that they've installed Trump as a president, I think success might be harder for them than failure, because now they have to fight one another to get Trump's ear. Well before they were united and fighting the dreaded scourge of the Democrats and the left. So that begs the question where are the fishers? I think the most, and how can those fishers be exploited?
Speaker 2:So I think for the most obvious and concrete fisher, we have to look at the oligarchs who are funding the movement. When I'm talking about oligarchs, I'm talking about people like Barry Side, for instance. He's a Jewish Chicago billionaire. Does Barry Side care about same-sex marriage? Probably not. He donated $1.6 billion to form something called the Marble Freedom Trust and he put Leonard Leo, who is one of the key activists of the movement, who's played an enormous role in pumping up the sort of right wing legal ecosphere, in charge of it. They can spend $230 million a year without touching the sort of nut of this investment, and Leonard Leo funds a lot of these culture issues.
Speaker 2:Or we're looking at people like Betsy DeVos and her extended family, who are Reformed, which is a variety of sort of evangelical Christian, deeply reactionary, and she's devoted to destroying public education as we know it. So they're very different, these oligarchs, but really what they want to do is lock in their monopoly profits. Just for fun, you should Google Betsy DeVos's yachts I mean with an S at the end of it or houses it's really an extraordinary exercise from their activities. Yet they still want to continue to receive these public subsidies. They want to keep labor costs down. They're also devoting Betsy DeVos some of her vast wealth is going to break the labor unions.
Speaker 2:So meanwhile, the rank and file, broadly speaking, want exactly the opposite in terms of economics. They want a better shake for the workforce generally and the fair deal for themselves generally, and most of them want strong public education, great public schools where their children can get a fantastic education and get a fair shake in life. But these groups, in a way the oligarchs and the rank and file, are unified at a symbolic level. Both sides pitch themselves recently as disruptors and destroyers of the regime or the status quo, whatever they call it. But as long as they remain at that level of abstraction it holds. But once the differences in what they want can be highlighted, then we might begin to see some real tensions there. And I think we see a similar tension with the parts of the movement that sees itself as religiously driven. The funders want government off their backs, but the religious theocrats want government on everybody's back and perhaps in everybody's bedroom. So there are these deep tensions in the movement and they can and should be highlighted and exploited.
Speaker 1:Yeah, absolutely, it's fascinating. As you say, it seems to come down a lot to the individuals who are running the movement in terms of what their priorities are. And you bring in the third pillar of this, which is the money side of everything, and I know you have a new book coming out shortly Money Lies and God, why so Many Americans have Turned Against Democracy. And I wonder, drawing on what you've mentioned already or any additional themes Money Lies and God why so Many Americans have Turned Against Democracy. I wonder, drawing on what you've mentioned already or any additional themes, why do you think there has been this what seems quite sudden shift against democracy?
Speaker 2:What are the drivers behind that. Yeah, the shift wasn't sudden. It's been built up over the past five decades and now we're seeing the consequences. When I started reporting on this movement, the big story in religion was the rise of the nuns, people who don't happen to identify with any particular religion, and I could see that the movement was investing a huge amount of money and strategy in legal strategies that were going to erode or even destroy the separation of church and state, which is really the foundation of democracy, necessary for true religious freedom in a country as pluralistic and diverse as ours.
Speaker 2:I'd like to briefly summarize the reason for the title, because I think it helps us understand the different categories at work in this anti-democratic movement. The book is titled Money Lies in God because, of course, money is a huge part of the story. Huge concentrations of wealth have destabilized the political system and made a lot of Americans very anxious, and those anxieties can be easily weaponized and hurled against the perceived political enemies. Second lies, or conscious disinformation, is another huge feature of the movement Some of these funders are investing in. I can only call it a propaganda sphere or right-wing disinformation sphere, in order to separate the rank and file from the facts, which makes them easier to control.
Speaker 2:Of course, a huge number of Americans now believe really crazy conspiracies. Qanon right, I don't know how big that is here, but it's a massive thing. In America we have some members of Trump's incoming administration who go along with QAnon or have actively promoted the QAnon conspiracy. They universally adhere to the idea which is a lie that the 2020 election was stolen. It's funny, you know, elections are stolen when they don't go their way, and then they have these massive riots and storm the Capitol and assault police officers, but when an election does go their way, they're like oh, it worked, no more election fraud. And then, number three, god, because I think the most important ideological framework for the largest part of this anti-democratic movement is Christian nationalism.
Speaker 1:And with the pressures that are coming, do you foresee the institutions of democracy withstanding and holding? Do you think this is a more serious threat?
Speaker 2:I think it's a really serious threat, but I don't, you know, left my crystal ball in the other room. I think there are no features of the current democratic system as of yet. That means that MAGA will rule indefinitely. Even though they would certainly like to, they're happy to break and strange and rickety in some ways as ours as sort of democracy. It takes a long time to get certain things done. Some of Trump's policies will no doubt fail because they're unimplementable. Others will fail through incompetence. Others will fail because they'll get snarled up in the courts. We have elections in two years and four years.
Speaker 2:I am really encouraged by many people that I see starting to really recognize the threat. I think that for a long time, a lot of folks were asleep at the wheel. When I, along with some other researchers, started reporting on this movement, we were often called alarmist. Well, no one is calling us alarmist anymore. So I think the first step, of course, is to really recognize what we're up against, and the three books that I've written, you know I really talk about how this movement has come to power in a really technical way. I show how the infrastructure is built, how the leadership has been able to get on the same page. Through these networking organizations that get the heads of these organizations on the same page, I show where the ideological alignments are as well as the fissures, and I think by understanding the movement better we are better positioned to really mount an effective response.
Speaker 1:And on that, how do you see this movement influencing politics more globally? Obviously, you mentioned its prominence now in the US and we're looking at I'm speaking to you from the UK here we're seeing the rise of the far-rights across Europe and other parts of the world. Do you see the techniques of the Christian nationalist movements in the US being mirrored? Do you see it as a threat? More broadly?
Speaker 2:let's say, yeah, there's so much to say here, but let's start with the fact that it's clear that there are parallel movements overseas that are not in America, and the parallels are not entirely coincidental. We have right-wing leaders in the US colluding with right-wing leaders abroad to advance each other's interests. So in many instances you have US organizations planting divisions overseas and lending support in various ways to the movement abroad, but they're not doing it all by themselves. There are funders and leaders in other countries as well, and we have to keep in mind that there are nuances specific to different countries and regions. But the attack on democracy is by no means limited to the United States.
Speaker 2:I think of religious nationalism, as I used for my second book Inside the Dangerous Rise of Religious Nationalism, to make clear that there are parallels around the globe.
Speaker 2:So when you have leaders like Putin in Russia, orban in Hungary, erdogan in Turkey, or leaders in Iran, when these leaders are consolidating more authoritarian forms of political power, harsher, more extreme forms of restrictive political power, they'll bind themselves very tightly to ultra-conservative religious figures in their own countries in order to bubble wrap themselves in sanctimony.
Speaker 2:They're saying like I've got the holy man to my right, I've got the holy man to my left, you can't touch me. And they're doing this to guard against any investigation of their crimes, the abuses they're perpetrating against their own people and their kleptocracy, and the fact that, you know, in some instances they're handing off pieces of the public treasury to people who are good to them right as a reward for their loyalty, people who are good to them right as a reward for their loyalty. And you can describe these countries with various nuance, to various degrees, as theocracies in a certain fake sense, in that their laws are based on their holy texts and everybody has to either conform or pretend to conform, but really there are systems of authoritarian control where you have absolute suppression of free speech and absolute suppression of no real political opposition or no chance for the political opposition to really rise and be on the same playing field.
Speaker 1:I think that's fascinating. And how much do you see the leaders who kind of benefit from this movement, as mentioned with the new or the returning president in the US? You mentioned others, particularly across Europe? How much do you believe that they themselves are true believers or this is an advantageous marriage of convenience?
Speaker 2:That's a really good question and we really can't know. It's in people's hearts. No, it can vary. Some are more cynical than others. I might suspect more about this one or that one.
Speaker 2:I think some of them truly do believe, but that doesn't mean that they don't see it as in their interest. I mean, two things can be true at the same time. It's also, you know, they can truly believe they're doing God's will and what's right, and then they see that it's really terrific for their being rewarded in material ways and also rewarded by power, and they're happy about that. But those two things can go together. I think it's really important also the extent to which this world has sort of walled itself from reason. Many of these folks exist in a kind of echo chamber where each leader is saying the same thing and they're hearing it all the time from one another and that sort of confirms what they believe. So you know they're not really letting in what might come as doubt or questions about whether what they're doing is truly good for the country or it's a complicated picture.
Speaker 1:Yes, as I can say, and I can imagine it's also reinforcing as well. The longer you're in the movement, this time around, the rhetoric of the returning Trump him as president, but also everyone around him is much more religious in tone than it was the first time around. It seems as though it's almost become more reinforcing as the movement has gone on. With all that said and everything that you've covered today and, of course, obviously, the books and your work over the past 15 years, what have you found to be the most effective methods to counter the rise of religious nationalism?
Speaker 2:First of all, I take heart in the fact that more Americans support democracy and its institutions over some sort of cronyistic kleptocracy with theocratic and authoritarian features. I also meet a lot of people out there who are working every day to cut through the disinformation, polarization and strengthen our democracy, and they really give me hope, and I think they should give all of us hope, the most effective strategies. I mean, there are just so many avenues for engagement. I think that, first of all, understanding the nature of the threat is really important, so that you don't end up wasting your time, say, launching lawsuits that aren't going to go anywhere because of the way the courts are organized or because of the Supreme Court precedents and things like that. It's a good time right now to have moral courage and prepare ourselves for the challenges ahead. So we have to figure out how we do better Familiarize yourself with a threat, recognize it when it shows up and seems like a local initiative and you can recognize that it's part of a national initiative and then engaging in democracy-preserving initiatives in really powerful and actually really productive ways. I think that sometimes there are folks who show up for a march and they think that's the extent of the kind of activism they need to engage in. Well, marches are actually. I think it's really important to engage in broad-based actions that are more about turning out the vote, that are more about reaching people who wouldn't necessarily want to show up for a march. That might be the kind of thing that appeals to a certain sector of the professional classes, but we need to reach the ordinary American with the message that this is not in their interest. So highlighting those divisions between the oligarchs and some of the theocrats, for sure, and their own material interests day to day is really important.
Speaker 2:I think we need to be more committed and effective to turning out the base of voters who share those democratic values, who want a better deal for themselves, and we also need to work really hard to earn the trust of low propensity voters In a country in America where 40 to 50 percent of people simply don't turn out to vote and additional numbers have their votes downgraded through race-based gerrymandering. I don't know if you know what that is. It's a sort of strange way that they organized voter districts in the South in order to diminish the value of Black voters and Democratic voters, and then there are these sort of crazy laws that are passed. Oh, you can't bring people water while they're waiting in line to vote and, like in, say, a heavily Black district, they'll have lines because there aren't as many voter sites. I mean, there's all these sort of dirty tricks that the Republican Party has pursued in order to diminish the value of Black voters and Democratic voters. It really doesn't take a majority to win elections. All it takes is a disproportionately mobilized minority.
Speaker 2:So we need to really turn out the base of voters who share Democratic values and also stop allowing the right to frame the issues that we discuss. They want us to be focused on these shiny identity issues, which is a massive distraction from the much larger and more impactful policies that they are pursuing economic policies that affect everyday Americans, and we should be focused on those. And you know the right always accuses the left of playing identity politics, but they play it much harder. So you know, in the run-up to the 2024 election, I watched as that sort of MAGA movement really not only worked to turn out its base but to concentrate on low-propensity voters, on young people and on religious voters in swing states. I watched as they deployed misinformation in the politics of sort of culture war outrage to mobilize new voters to justify their vote for a corrupt and unfit candidate, but we have to remember that he won by a small margin, relatively speaking, and we need to work to win these majorities to our side.
Speaker 1:Yes, absolutely. I mean this is something that's echoed in many places this encouragement to really try to set the narrative and actually make the case for more liberal values, rather than be reactionary to any opinions out there that we don't like.
Speaker 2:Oh, much of this sort of moderate, liberal, left or whatever I would say, opposition plays right into their hands when they're like, oh, let's talk about this side issue here. No people are having trouble affording housing, people are having trouble affording their groceries. We need to be talking about these kinds of issues. Why is life getting harder for people? Why are our schools suffering? Why is life getting harder for people? Why are our schools suffering? Why is life getting more difficult for us? And focus on those issues rather than allowing us to get distracted with these shiny baubles.
Speaker 1:Yeah, and in this attention economy, it's important to do that and not to get distracted ourselves, as you say, and to focus on that. So, with all of these big challenges that you mentioned and, as you say, there's a lot that needs to be addressed Just before we wrap up I'd love to know what gives you hope.
Speaker 2:The fact that we're having this conversation gives me hope. There is no feature again of our system that is preventing us from speaking freely on these issues, and the people I meet who are working to preserve democracy give me hope as well. The fact that we still live in a sort of brilliantly pluralistic and diverse society with a certain measure. Listen. True, religious freedom is the freedom to believe any God or sacred idea, or none right. It's the freedom from having to support any religion with your tax dollars if you don't want to. It's the freedom from having to worship if you don't want to. It's a freedom from having to worship if you don't want to. So we still have a measure of religious freedom in America. It's being eroded, for sure, but we still have the right to free speech, the right to political activism. A lot of people are sort of shaking their heads in doom and gloom and saying democracy is over. Well, we're not quite there yet. We still have a lot of freedoms and we should exercise them and appreciate them.
Speaker 1:Wonderful, and thank you so much for highlighting all of those, as you have done, and, finally, our standard of closing question. Catherine, what's something which you've changed your mind on recently?
Speaker 2:Oh, just off the top of my head there are certain spices that I used to hate and now that I really love. I used to really hate anything with tarragon. Now I just think it's delicious. I don't know how that happened. If you have tarragon chicken, please send it my way and I'll gladly eat it.
Speaker 1:Catherine Stewart, thank you so much for taking the time to speak with us. Please remind us when is Money, lies and God going to be released in the US and the UK?
Speaker 2:Thank you so much. Money US and the UK, thank you so much. Money Lies in God. My newest book comes out in the US on February 18th and it launches in the UK in May, I believe or April and we very much look forward to that and hopefully we'll see you again.
Speaker 1:But thank you for joining us on Humanism Now.
Speaker 2:Thank you so much you.
