Although the year 1964 and the revival of religious fundamentalism in the 1970s and 1980s were important for the melding of religion and politics in Kansas and Texas, one must not ignore underlying factors and events that took place before then, sociology professor Robert Wuthnow, known for his work on the sociology of religion, argued in a lecture on Thursday.
Wuthnow began his lecture by explaining why he was focusing on those two states in particular, saying that although both states are now known as religious and Republican, and both voted for Romney in 2012, Kansas is much smaller and has a history of voting Republican, while Texas began as a slave state and formerly voted Democrat.
Wuthnow noted that despite the complex interrelationship between church and state in the politics of Kansas and Texas, both states have a strong tradition of freedom of religion, as well as of separation between church and state. These values were guaranteed both in Texas’ state constitution of 1845 and Kansas’ state constitution of 1859.
“Most people who look at the Constitution in these states think the Founders were right that there should be separation of state and freedom of religion,” Wuthnow said.
Kansas and Texas both had identities as frontiers for settlers, Wuthnow explained, and religion was a crucial part of settlers’ way of life. Church leaders and churches in neighboring towns would try to outdo each other, and the resulting competition kept fringe groups in check. Since churches were often located in the center of town, they were in a good position to influence local affairs.
Kansas and Texas also had a tradition of civil religion, Wuthnow said. The Battle of the Alamo is a historical event to high school students, but for Texans it represents anti-Catholicism and “liberty of conscience.” For Kansas, Wuthnow noted, the abolitionist John Brown took on an almost mythical significance.
Moving into the 20th century, Wuthnow said that the 1920s represented one further step in the convergence of church and state. The Prohibitionist movement made religious ideas into a political goal, and religious groups were shaken up when Al Smith, a Catholic, ran for president. Although Texas usually voted Democrat, and Smith belonged to the Democratic party, many members of the Protestant clergy in Texas voted for Hoover, Wuthnow noted.
“ ‘Liberty of conscience’ now meant bringing religion into politics,” he said.
Wuthnow then explained that both states always had a history of antigovernment sentiment. Kansas, he said, had an animosity against President Franklin Pierce and viewed President Franklin Delano Roosevelt as elitist, blaming him for the Dust Bowl. Though Texas was still Democratic, FDR created a split in Texas Democrats.
Wuthnow noted that 1964 was still a very important year, despite the overall tone of his lecture. One of the most important antigovernment speeches of American history was the “Time for Choosing” speech that future President Ronald Reagan gave in that year, he said. He also noted that some University of Kansas students who had worked for Barry Goldwater’s campaign would later go on to become political and religious leaders themselves.
He concluded his speech by saying that religious fundamentalism is not, despite popular opinion, completely intolerant of opposing views.
“The die is never completely cast,” Wuthnow said. “The great strength of religious pluralism is that there can be dissenting voices.”

The lecture, titled “Red State Religion: Religion and Politics in Kansas and Texas,” took place at 4:30 p.m. in the Architecture Building.