Prove me wrong.
“Charlie Kirk hated nobody.” Prove anonymous stickers wrong.
Challenge accepted. Let us look at a few definitions. From Oxford Languages
Hate Speech - abusive or threatening speech or writing that expresses prejudice on the basis of ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, or similar grounds.
Hate - intense or passionate dislike.
From American Library Association
Hate Speech - is any form of expression through which speakers intend to vilify, humiliate, or incite hatred against a group or a class of persons on the basis of race, religion, skin color, sexual identity, gender identity, ethnicity, disability, or national origin.
Now let's look at 14 examples where Charlie Kirk has not just hated someone but entire groups of people and said things that vilify, humiliate, and incite hatred against groups of blacks, immigrants, women, and Islam.
On race
If I see a Black pilot, I’m going to be like, boy, I hope he’s qualified.
– The Charlie Kirk Show, 23 January 2024
If you’re a WNBA, pot-smoking, Black lesbian, do you get treated better than a United States marine?
– The Charlie Kirk Show, 8 December 2022
Happening all the time in urban America, prowling Blacks go around for fun to go target white people, that’s a fact. It’s happening more and more.
– The Charlie Kirk Show, 19 May 2023
If I’m dealing with somebody in customer service who’s a moronic Black woman, I wonder is she there because of her excellence, or is she there because of affirmative action?
– The Charlie Kirk Show, 3 January 2024
If we would have said that Joy Reid and Michelle Obama and Sheila Jackson Lee and Ketanji Brown Jackson were affirmative action picks, we would have been called racists. Now they’re coming out and they’re saying it for us … You do not have the brain processing power to otherwise be taken really seriously. You had to go steal a white person’s slot to go be taken somewhat seriously.
– The Charlie Kirk Show, 13 July 2023
On gender, feminism and reproductive rights
Reject feminism. Submit to your husband, Taylor. You’re not in charge.
– Discussing news of Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce’s engagement on The Charlie Kirk Show, 26 August 2025
The answer is yes, the baby would be delivered.
– Responding to a question about whether he would support his 10-year-old daughter aborting a pregnancy conceived because of rape on the debate show Surrounded, published on 8 September 2024
We need to have a Nuremberg-style trial for every gender-affirming clinic doctor. We need it immediately.
– The Charlie Kirk Show, 1 April 2024
On immigration
America was at its peak when we halted immigration for 40 years and we dropped our foreign-born percentage to its lowest level ever. We should be unafraid to do that.
– The Charlie Kirk Show, 22 August 2025
The American Democrat party hates this country. They wanna see it collapse. They love it when America becomes less white.
– The Charlie Kirk Show, 20 March 2024
The great replacement strategy, which is well under way every single day in our southern border, is a strategy to replace white rural America with something different.
– The Charlie Kirk Show, 1 March 2024
On Islam
America has freedom of religion, of course, but we should be frank: large dedicated Islamic areas are a threat to America.
– The Charlie Kirk Show, 30 April 2025
We’ve been warning about the rise of Islam on the show, to great amount of backlash. We don’t care, that’s what we do here. And we said that Islam is not compatible with western civilization.
– The Charlie Kirk Show, 24 June 2025
Islam is the sword the left is using to slit the throat of America.
– Charlie Kirk social media post, 8 September 2025
Prove Steven Hassan PhD wrong.
Trump followers are in a cult.
Here’s a book: ‘A Leading Cult Expert Explains How the President Uses Mind Control’ by Steven Hassan PhD. I look forward to your rebuttal. It should be at the library if you don’t want to buy it: https://freedomofmind.com/the-cult-of-trump/.
Or a video of: “Why I Say Trumpism is a CULT” | Steve Hassan
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L15xKqUPwBw
ON RACE
“If I see a Black pilot, I’m going to be like, boy, I hope he’s qualified.”
– The Charlie Kirk Show, 23 January 2024
Reality: If you passed the pilots school and exam you're a qualified pilot. Color does not matter except that white people are more able to afford to send themselves to advanced schools because of generational benefits, zoning laws, banking rules, and many other things that systemically kept black people from having the same ability to gain wealth as white people.
For more on this please read ‘White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack’ by Peggy McIntosh © 1989 Which gives everyday examples on how whites have an easier time than blacks.
https://www.nationalseedproject.org/key-seed-texts/white-privilege-unpacking-the-invisible-knapsack where you can read or download the essay.
This essay also quickly disproves Kirk's claim of ‘White privilege is a myth’ and shows with everyday examples how he is wrong.
Or please read: ‘UNDERSTANDING WHITE PRIVILEGE’ by Francis E. Kendall, Ph.D., © 2002
https://www.american.edu/student-affairs/counseling/upload/understanding-white-privilege.pdf
ON RACE
If you’re a WNBA, pot-smoking, Black lesbian, do you get treated better than a United States marine?
– The Charlie Kirk Show, 8 December 2022
Reality: No, and not just the premier Marine branch but all of the military members get discounts in many places they go not to mention access to the post exchange shopping. When military members wear hats, shirts, or other clothing or accessories that identify that they are military, they get thanked by many people in the public. Military members get preferred loans for housing. Military members have preferred job placement in government jobs. Military members often get free career or college training. Military members get access to private banking and insurance companies. Military members get access to very nice hotels in Europe. Many in the military retire with pensions and benefits. None of those treatments are extended to women basketball players regardless of their color, preference in lovers, or recreational activities.
For more on this please read: ‘The invisibility of white privilege, with Brian Lowery, PhD’
https://www.apa.org/news/podcasts/speaking-of-psychology/white-privilege
where you can read this article.
Or please read: ‘White Privilege Explained, Understanding Systemic Inequalities’ by Calgery Anti-Racism Education
https://www.aclrc.com/issues/anti-racism/cared/the-basics-level-1/white-privilege/
ON RACE
“Happening all the time in urban America, prowling Blacks go around for fun to go target white people, that’s a fact. It’s happening more and more.”
– The Charlie Kirk Show, 19 May 2023
Reality: Statistics do not back up this statement. If one were to look, statistics show that most violent crime is intraracial (victim and offender are the same race).
According to the Intraracial Nature of Crime, the vast majority of violent crimes are committed within the same race. According to BJS data, 80% of black victims are victimized by black offenders, and 73% of white victims of violent crime are attacked by other white people.
If you look at Homicide Data they would find things like in 2019, 81% of white homicide victims were killed by white offenders, while 91% of Black homicide victims were killed by Black offenders.
If one were to look at Interracial Crime Rates one would see that while statistics indicate that crimes with white victims and black offenders are more common than the reverse (566 vs 246 in 2019, for example), sociologists attribute these differences to factors such as population size, residential segregation, and socio-economic disparities rather than a targeted, racialized selection of victims.
If the argument is on the context of Arrest Data then the data shows that while Black individuals are overrepresented in arrest statistics for certain violent crimes relative to their share of the total U.S. population (13.4%), these figures are influenced by systemic issues such as discriminatory policing and socioeconomic factors.
Further if you come across Exoneration Statistics, data shows that Black people are overrepresented among those wrongly convicted of murder, particularly when the victims were white. Among Black people exonerated from murder convictions, 31% were wrongly convicted of killing white people. That’s 1 in 3 falsely convicted if you're black.
Claims suggesting a widespread, targeted trend of "prowling" are generally recognized as inaccurate, relying on the weaponization of data that ignores the context of crime, including socioeconomic factors and policing, according to researchers and civil rights organizations.
For more on this please read: “Systemic Racism in Crime: Do Blacks Commit More Crimes Than Whites?” By: Claudia Williamson Kramer February 13, 2024
Or please read: ‘8 Facts You Should Know About Racial Injustice in the Criminal Legal System’ by Daniele Selby Feb 5, 2021
ON RACE
You will never be the best version of yourself if you allow other people to convince you that you can't be better because of your skin color, because of your sexual identity, because of the community you came from. You must resist those narratives at all costs if you truly want to be successful in America.
– Charlie Kirk
Reality: True that you shouldn’t let others convince you. But there is more to the story here than simply convincing others. Systemic racism transfers through the generations. When the US did not do reparations in the 1800’s with 40 acres and a mule then freed slaves started with nothing. If black people collected anything, there are several examples where white mobs would destroy it. They worked and survived but banks would not loan them money for a house or business, they were restricted in where they could live, or go. When they died most passed along nothing. Their sons went to WW1 and WW2 but they were denied the GI bill when they came home. When they died most passed along nothing and their sons had to start from scratch. Thats generations where they were not only blocked from what white people had access to but many generations after slavery ended where white people felt entitled to what black people had and took it at will without repercussion. Many white people viewed black people as animals, as the violent ones, the minority, and less than. That doesn’t just lead to people trying to convince you of who you are, that leads to laws, policies, and norms that prevent an entire group of people from having the same opportunities.
Some look at this quote as proof that Kirk was not a racist but the failure to recognize that the system hurts minorities in more ways than convincing them is just more proof of systemic racism still pushing against equality.
For more please read: ‘10 Examples of Systemic Racism in the USA’ by Emmaline Soken-Huberty
https://www.humanrightscareers.com/issues/examples-of-systemic-racism/
Or please read: ‘Systemic And Structural Racism: Definitions, Examples, Health Damages, And Approaches To Dismantling’
https://www.healthaffairs.org/doi/10.1377/hlthaff.2021.01394
ON FEMINISM
Reject feminism. Submit to your husband, Taylor. You’re not in charge.
– Discussing news of Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce’s engagement on The Charlie Kirk Show, 26 August 2025
Reality: Women are human and deserve to be treated as equals. They should not have to submit to anyone unless they want to.
Feminism is at its core, the belief that the sexes should have equal access to political, social, and economic equality, as well as the advocacy to make it a reality. Every human is living their own complex existence, complete with dreams, fears, triumphs, and losses. When we restrict half of our population from achieving greater things, we break a part of the human experience and limit our society and progress. The notion that women belong in a home, creating more children, limits otherwise brilliant people to a single object, robbing them of opportunity, education, and identity that is separate from their biology.
In a world that so values its freedom, speech, gun ownership, political and religious affiliation, why is it correct to take from half the population the freedom of choosing what they do with their lives? To deny women education, travel, healthcare, a career, or to make those things more difficult to attain, we restrict and eliminate the brilliance of women like:
https://oumnh.ox.ac.uk/learn-shout-out-for-women-in-science
Barbara McClintok (1902-1992) - Geneticist who won a Nobel Prize for her work with DNA and cellular biology.
Marie Curie (1867-1934) - Physicist and chemist. Studied radiation, its medical uses, discovered multiple elements, and created a portable X-Ray system for WW1 battlefield medics.
Margaret Hamilton - a Leading software engineer at MIT, she led the development of NASA’s Apollo program, writing the code that guided the moon landing.
Chien-Shiung Wu (1912-1997) - an experimental physicist who worked on nuclear projects, such as Manhattan. Her theory of Beta Decay changed how nuclear science was done.
Women are capable of achieving success that has nothing to do with the men in their lives, and should not be required to shape themselves because of their gender. A meta-analysis of 46 studies conducted over 20 years from the American Psychology Association found that “men and women are basically alike in terms of personality, cognitive ability and leadership.” Noting that “gender differences had either no or a very small effect on most of the psychological variables examined.” https://www.apa.org/topics/personality/men-women-difference
ON REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS
We need to have a Nuremberg-style trial for every gender-affirming clinic doctor. We need it immediately.
– The Charlie Kirk Show, 1 April 2024
Reality :The Nuremberg trials were about prosecuting war crimes committed by the Nazi’s party. This includes the kidnapping, incarceration, and murder of millions of people, the killing of hostages, prisoners of war, and survivors of attacks, the plundering of property, unethical human experimentation, false imprisonment, invasion, mass incarceration, etc… (https://nuremberg.law.harvard.edu/)
Gender-affirming care is not a war crime, it's healthcare. Gender affirming care is any care that makes a person more comfortable in their bodies including care like: lip fillers, breast implants, liposuction, erectile dysfunction meds, treatment for polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), hormones after menopause, hair removal, and hair plugs.
For the Gender affirming care that you are thinking of it has saved countless lives from suicide and rates of regret are less than 1% among trans people (https://www.americanjournalofsurgery.com/article/S0002-9610(24)00238-1/abstract). That's 100 people alive and 1 regretting it vs 7 in 10 thinking about suicide and 4 in 10 attempting suicide (according to the Trevor Project). Remember that not all who start gender affirming care go through with a full transition; many treatments are reversable, which contributes to why the regret rate is so low.
These are nowhere near the same level.
https://www.thetrevorproject.org/survey-2024/
ON GUN VIOLENCE
I think it’s worth it to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the second amendment to protect our other God-given rights. That is a prudent deal. It is rational.
– Event organized by TPUSA Faith, the religious arm of Kirk’s conservative group Turning Point USA, on 5 April 2023
Reality: People do not need to die for us to have rights and if they do have to die to have that right then maybe it's not a good right to have.
If we care so much about the children, why are we not protecting them from gun deaths?
Statistics about mass shootings in other countries where they instituted gun laws and stopped having gun deaths.
We can change our future like other countries, we just have to care about each other enough to try.
Death rates from firearm violence in the US are closest to rates seen in countries experiencing active conflicts.
Only a dozen or so countries have a rate of suicide by gun higher than the US. There are 195 countries in the world.
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/gun-deaths-by-country
There is so much hate towards China and other countries but look at where they are on this chart.
Every single day in America hundreds of people are shot and over a hundred die with 20 of those being kids. 20 kids every single day are lost to gun violence.
https://www.bradyunited.org/resources/statistics
Mass Shootings are committed by white males at a rate 5 times that of hispanics and white males beat all other ethnicities added together.
https://rockinst.org/gun-violence/mass-shooting-factsheet/
Gun deaths are not a norm around the world, just here. We can have guns and gun rights without deaths. We just need to be sensible about having and using laws that protect people.
First we need to collect statistics on gun deaths. We stopped looking because it looked so bad.
Second would be to have safe storage laws in all states. Only 19 states have Child Access Prevention laws.
Third universal background checks on all non family transfers. While also holding family members responsible for giving guns to those that shouldn’t have them.
Fourth we should remove laws that encourage gun crimes like stand your ground laws.
Fifth we should have an honest look and discussion at why mass casualty events go down when we limit access to fully and semi automatic weapons. We banned fully automatic weapons without a special permit and saw a dramatic drop in deaths. In 1992 when we banned assault rifles we again saw a dramatic drop in deaths, when that ban was lifted (sunset) the death rates increased again. The QR code takes you directly to: https://www.rand.org/pubs/commentary/2022/05/the-gun-laws-that-work-and-the-gun-laws-that-dont.html
ON IMMIGRATION
“America was at its peak when we halted immigration for 40 years and we dropped our foreign-born percentage to its lowest level ever. We should be unafraid to do that.”
– The Charlie Kirk Show, 22 August 2025
America didn't completely halt immigration for 40 years, but the Immigration Act of 1924 (Johnson-Reed Act) (https://history.state.gov/milestones/1921-1936/immigration-act) drastically restricted it for about four decades, establishing strict national quotas favoring Northern/Western Europeans and effectively ending mass immigration from Southern/Eastern Europe and Asia until the system was reformed in the 1960s. This era, roughly 1924-1965, saw a significant slowdown in arrivals, a period sometimes described as a "pause," not a complete stop, according to reports from the Center for Immigration Studies.
Some other events that happened during that time were the Great Depression from 1929 – 1939 and World War 2 from 1939-1945. Estimates suggest the United States allowed in no more than 250,000 Jewish refugees between 1933 and 1944, a tiny number compared to the roughly 6 million who were killed. Then there was the Korean War from 1950-1953, the Space Race of 1958 (led by immigrants from WW2 like Wernher Von Braun and Albert Einstein), and the Civil Rights Movement from 1955 - 1965.
Also to make up for the loss of immigrants we had to create the Bracero Program (importing Mexican farmers to harvest food) from 1942-1964 so America could eat. (https://guides.loc.gov/latinx-civil-rights/bracero-program )
Of particular note is that the KKK was a major proponent to getting the 1924 Johnson-Reed Act passed. That the explicit goal of the quotas in the act was to rewind the country’s racial and ethnic mix to a time dominated by Western and Northern European immigration. Reed, one of the lead sponsors, wrote in The New York Times that, with the bill’s passage, “The composition of our population will not change in the future decades in the same way in which it changed between 1885 and the outbreak of the World War.” The United States would then become “a more homogeneous nation” and a “vastly better place to live in,” he added.
Today’s debates center on whether immigrants violated border laws or present a threat to national security. At times, implicit in these concerns are fears that immigrants from certain countries or of certain religions have undesirable social traits, incompatible values, or poverty that would drain public resources. And the language of eugenics still sometimes rears its head, such as when former President Donald Trump claimed last year that immigrants are “poisoning the blood” of the United States.
We should denounce xenophobia on every level and immigration caps are on that level. Most economists say that immigration is good for the U.S. economy because it helps grow the size of the labor force, boost tax revenue, and it increases consumer demand. (https://www.cfr.org/articles/how-does-immigration-affect-us-economy )
ON IMMIGRATION
The great replacement strategy, which is well under way every single day in our southern border, is a strategy to replace white rural America with something different.
– The Charlie Kirk Show, 1 March 2024
Reality: The “Great Replacement” is one of the most dangerous white supremacist conspiracy theories. This theory has:
No Factual or Scientific Basis: There is a consensus among academic scholars and experts that no historical, demographic, or sociological evidence supports the idea of an organized, conspiratorial effort to replace native populations. The theory relies on "perception" and fear rather than empirical data.
Misinterpretation of Demographics: Proponents often misrepresent or exaggerate immigration statistics and ignore the complexities of demographic shifts. Factors like declining birth rates are a global phenomenon, not specific to a single ethnic group, and the theory often makes unscientific assumptions about "immutable identities" and low rates of intermarriage that do not reflect reality.
Racist and Xenophobic Origins: The theory is widely recognized as a debunked white nationalist conspiracy theory, rooted in racist, antisemitic, and Islamophobic worldviews. The language often used, such as "invasion" or "occupiers," serves to dehumanize immigrants and minorities.
Hypocrisy Regarding History: Critics point out the historical irony in the theory's claims, noting that European populations, through settler-colonial projects, previously enacted their own forms of "replacement" of indigenous populations in other parts of the world.
Political Mischaracterizations: The idea that a specific political party is orchestrating mass migration to create a new, compliant electorate is also factually incorrect. Non-citizens cannot vote in federal elections, and voting patterns among naturalized citizens are complex and do not guarantee a specific political outcome.
Harmful Real-World Consequences: Beyond its lack of truth, the theory is dangerous because it has been cited as the motivation for numerous acts of racist violence and mass shootings (e.g., in Christchurch, El Paso, and Buffalo). It stokes fear and hostility, creating a hostile environment for black, immigrant, and other minority communities.
For more reading please check out this article: ‘The “Great Replacement” Conspiracy Theory, From The Fringe Of White Supremacist Circles To The Mainstream’ by globalextremism.org
https://globalextremism.org/the-great-replacement/
Or this article: ‘The Racist ‘Great Replacement’ Conspiracy Theory Explained’ May 17, 2022
https://www.splcenter.org/resources/hatewatch/racist-great-replacement-conspiracy-theory-explained/
Or because this is important, please read this article: ‘How the Great Replacement Theory can lead to violent outcomes’ By Silvia Allegretta, Jonas R. Kunst, & Milan Obaidi
https://csblab.com/2022/03/01/the-great-replacement-theory-violence/
ON ISLAM
We’ve been warning about the rise of Islam on the show, to great amount of backlash. We don’t care, that’s what we do here. And we said that Islam is not compatible with western civilization.
– The Charlie Kirk Show, 24 June 2025
Reality: Muslims have absorbed a great deal from the West, especially in relation to democracy, human rights, and democratic forms of governance. There's been a great deal of absorption on the part of Muslims from the West. Almost every Muslim society today including those which have remained closed and cloistered have faced the force of democracy. It's been one of the greatest political forces of the 20th and 21st century.
One debt that the West owes to Islam is the realm of science. The roots of science, the evolution of science, the scientific method, the number zero are all products of the Islam world. Think of the level of comfort you live in today because of science and all the things we can do and use because of science. It's everything we touch, see, and hear all day long. It's our comfort, convenience, cosmetics, transportation, and everything.
One should also be aware that there are ideas pertaining to inter-gender relations which would put Islam in a very positive light, because one doesn't see that today. One sees Islam partly because of the media, but partly because of the behavior of certain Muslim groups as a religion that is somewhat contemptuous of the role of the woman. But that is not true of all Muslim groups for all of Muslim history, for instance, that chivalry as an idea actually grew out of Islamic civilization, that it was absorbed by the West... There are all sorts of rights which are given to [to women], and these were rights that [Muslim] women enjoyed 1,400 years ago.
Lets also consider the word Islam means peace and also surrender.
Based on these 4 things, and honestly there are many more, it is easy to see that Christians and Muslims have been coexisting for thousands of years. That our societies are compatible because they are working together, sharing information, and have been adapting to make room for each other. It's mostly when Christians feel the need to have a crusade, a campaign for oil, or back an invasion of another religion that our societies have clashed.
Some recommended reading is a study ‘Islam and the West in world history’ by “Shahrough Akhavi’ who was in the Department of Government and International Studies at the University of South Carolina, Columbia
“this article examines the nature of their relations over the centuries and concludes that, although convergence between them is not likely, grounds for mutual tolerance and co-existence have always existed and can, in future, exist. Understanding that proprietary liberalism is not the only model for democracy is a necessary first step in the assessment of the long-term prospects for stable relations between Islam and the West”
https://library.fes.de/libalt/journals/swetsfulltext/16987773.pdf
Also please read ‘Chapter 3: Understanding Islam in America in the Aftermath of 9/11’ a compilation of many works by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.
https://www.usccr.gov/files/pubs/sac/dc0603/ch3.htm
ON ISLAM
Islam is the sword the left is using to slit the throat of America.
– Charlie Kirk social media post, 8 September 2025
Reality: What?!?! How is the left using Islam? How is it slitting the throat of America? There was no explanation of this statement on the show.
The following are snippets from an article at https://medium.com/@SaidAbdulLatif/do-muslims-commit-a-disproportionate-amount-of-crime-in-the-united-states-a-look-at-the-facts-adc66d1b4772 Please read the whole article.
Immigrants commit significantly less crime than the U.S.-born population, and more than half of U.S. Muslims are immigrants or children of immigrants.² This is consistent with a long line of criminological evidence showing that immigration generally correlates with lower rates of crime across multiple generations. Countries with majority Muslim populations tend on average to have lower homicide rates than countries with very low Muslim populations.³ This does not mean Islamic belief “causes peace,” but it undermines the notion that Islamic identity correlates with criminality.
No one is arguing that all Muslims are angels or that crime magically disappears when someone takes the shahada. Human beings — all of them — are capable of great virtue and great evil. But the leap from individual wrongdoing to collective guilt is both statistically illegitimate and morally reckless. It is the hallmark of societies in decline, societies that need scapegoats to distract from deeper structural problems.
The truth is that the United States has a crime problem because it has an inequality problem, a poverty problem, a racism problem, a mental health problem, a lack-of-community problem, and, increasingly, a media manipulation problem. Religion barely registers compared to any of these. But blaming Muslims is easier than confronting complicated systemic rot.
Blaming Muslims is the entire goal and plan in order to deflect from the crimes and atrocities committed daily by America’s “greatest ally”: Israel. Blaming Muslims is how you get a population on board with funding genocide.
This is manipulation. Plain and simple. And the American people are all taken along for the ride. And meanwhile, none of the problems of the United States are being solved. They only get worse, while the powers-that-be simply aim at perpetuating the problems they themselves manufacture.
The enemy is, indeed, within the gates. But we are instructed to fixate on a phantom menace at the border, in the mosque, on TikTok, or in our neighborhoods. Anything to ensure we do not look behind the curtain; anything to make certain we never ask who benefits from this fear. The question of “Muslim criminality” is not about Muslims. It is about power, propaganda, and the oldest political trick in the world: inventing villains so the real ones can walk free.
2. American Immigration Council, “Debunking the Myth of Immigrant Criminality,” 2021, https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/fact-sheet/debunking-myth-immigrants-and-crime
3. “Islam and Violence” Wikipedia, citing United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) data, accessed December 2025.
ON RELIGION
“There is no separation of church and state. It’s a fabrication, it’s a fiction, it’s not in the constitution. It’s made up by secular humanists.”
– The Charlie Kirk Show, 6 July 2022
Reality: The Constitution itself is a secular document, the first government document not to mention a deity, deriving power from the people, not gods. The framers of the constitution put in that very document article 1 and article 6 to ensure a separation of church and the state. The first states that you have the freedom of religion as in the state will not limit or force your religious compliance. The sixth states that there will be no religious test for office allowing representation from any religion or none.
Besides the constitution, consider this: The Christian bible does not lay out any mode of civil government. Christ went so far as to say "render unto Caesar that which is Caesar." Christ was concerned with the spiritual, not the profane. In that sense it is an extreme folly to place the Constitution into the realm of the religious because Christ himself did not at any time attempt to tell anyone how to run a nation.
However, the Founders were well aware of what happened when a government attempted to rule on a religious basis. England had a bloody revolution during the 1600s based in large part on fights over the church. Dissenters were executed and exiled. Great thinkers like Roger Williams, Sir Edward Coke, and others were under constant threat of being brutally executed in public for not wholly complying with the wishes of the head of the Church of England.
By keeping religion out of the federal constitution, the founders explicitly rejected the notion that the country would be governed by faith, or the government attempting to discern the will of God and govern accordingly.
Read some of the following for interesting bits about this:
‘Ratification’ by Pam Maier,
the most recent biography of ‘Roger Williams’ by Barry,
there are some interesting snippets in ‘Friedman's History of American law’,
and some good source documents in ‘Hall and Finkelman's American Legal History’.
Some other noteworthy statements from our past:
John Adams (2nd president and VP To George Washington)(1797): An official treaty, the ‘Treaty of Tripoli’, signed by President John Adams explicitly stated the U.S. government "is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion".
Thomas Jefferson (3rd president)(1802): In his letter to the Danbury Baptists, he coined the phrase "wall of separation between Church & State," advocating for a clear boundary between government and religious institutions. Jefferson further believed that combining civil governance and religion served to subjugate people to a sort of hybrid church/state monster while also bastardizing religion. https://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/9806/danpre.html
James Madison (AKA The father of the constitution and the 4th president)(1785): In his Memorial and Remonstrance, he argued that religious establishments breed corruption and that a free society requires protecting religious conscience from government interference.
So being secular is not in the constitution because it is the constitution as designed by the framers.
Further, secular humanists are people who hold a nonreligious, ethical worldview centered on human reason, compassion, and scientific inquiry to build a better world, rejecting supernatural beliefs and religious dogma as the basis for morality, instead valuing human experience and ethics derived from logic, experience, and consequences for well-being. They advocate for secular governance, a strong separation of church and state, and promote values like integrity, fairness, and responsibility through critical thinking to solve human problems.
Here at the end we find a bit of truth. The founding fathers of our country were secular humanists. Those secular humanists made the constitution a secular document and gave us a secular government.
The people who care about democracy are fighting to keep this constitution alive and freedom from religion is part of that.