February 1st, 2026 | Nathan Daniel

The Separation Of Church And COnservatism

It's time for the party and grassroots to go full secular.

Imagine a Canada where conservative values thrive not because of ancient scriptures, but because they make practical sense for our shared future. A place where fiscal responsibility, personal freedom, and strong communities stand on their own merits, without needing divine endorsement. This vision is not only possible but essential if Canadian conservatism is to remain relevant in our increasingly atheistic and secular society. For too long, religious influences have intertwined with conservative politics, creating barriers that alienate potential supporters and limit the movement's reach. The time has come for Canadian conservatives to separate church from conservatism, recognizing that religion is not required for morality or core conservative principles. This shift would strengthen the movement, broaden its appeal, and align it more closely with the realities of modern culture.

To understand why this separation is necessary, consider the historical context. Religion has played a significant role in shaping Canadian conservatism, but its influence has evolved and often waned. In the early days of Confederation, conservative politics drew from Protestant and Catholic traditions, emphasizing moral order and ties to the British monarchy. Figures like John A. Macdonald embodied a conservatism rooted in traditional institutions, including the church, which helped maintain social stability in a young nation. However, as Canada matured, secularism began to take hold, particularly after the Quiet Revolution in Quebec during the 1960s, which diminished the Catholic Church's grip on public life and paved the way for a more neutral state. By the late 20th century, grassroots social conservatism linked to evangelical Christianity emerged as a response to Liberal reforms, such as changes in abortion laws and same-sex marriage. This religious infusion helped form alliances within the Conservative Party, but it also created divisions.

Studies show that while religious Canadians are more likely to vote Conservative, their numbers are declining, and the party's reliance on them risks shrinking its base in a country where church attendance has dropped from around 40% in the 1980s to much lower levels today.

This historical entanglement highlights a key problem: when conservatism ties itself too closely to religion, it becomes vulnerable to perceptions of "intolerance" or irrelevance. In recent years, we've seen how religious rhetoric can alienate voters. For instance, during the 2022 Freedom Convoy protests, evangelical influences were prominent, yet efforts to build a broader "religious right" similar to the United States have largely failed due to Canada's stronger secular traditions and more "inclusive" attitudes toward immigrants and diverse faiths. The convoy's entanglement with several more faith-based organizations undoubtedly alienated many potential supporters who opposed the same mandates, but didn't feel comfortable associating with groups tilted heavily toward motivations driven by faith. 

It is also important to reject the idea that Gen Z are becoming more religious. They aren't. They are, in fact, the least religious generation alive at the moment, with 34% identifying as irreligious. The data is mixed and religious trends continue to favour more secular spiritual views, agnosticism, and atheism over the next 30 years.

Unlike in the U.S., where conservative politics often revolves around Christian nationalism, Canadian conservatism has historically focused more on economic issues like limited government and free enterprise, with social conservatism playing a secondary role. Yet, as social conservatism wanes—evidenced by the Conservative Party's decision in 2016 to drop its opposition to same-sex marriage—the movement risks losing ground if it clings to religious elements that no longer resonate with the majority.

Now, picture a conservatism that appeals to all Canadians, regardless of faith. By reducing religious influence, grassroots conservatives could attract secular voters who share values like individual responsibility and economic prudence but are turned off by faith-based policies. Whether anyone likes it or not, Canada is one of the most secular countries in the world, with over a quarter of the population identifying as non-religious, and this group is growing fastest among younger generations. Insisting on religious underpinnings alienates these potential allies, who view "religion" as conservative, dogmatic, or at odds with progress. Moreover, in a multicultural society, privileging any kind of religious traditions can foster division, as seen in debates over Quebec's secularism laws or federal policies on religious symbols.

A more secular conservatism would promote unity by focusing on shared principles that transcend faith, such as protecting freedoms without imposing beliefs. It could turn fewer atheists and agnostics away from conservative groups that tend to focus on social issues through a Christian lens, rather than fact and evidence based perspectives.

On issues of abortion and nuclear families, conservative policies can lean on statistical and cultural facts. Killing more babies and breaking up families through the promotion of promiscuity and the destruction of family values leads to civilizational decay. We don't need faith to see that. We are seeing the evidence for it in real time.

One common objection is that without religion, morality crumbles. But this fear is unfounded; morality can and does exist independently of religious doctrine. Philosophers have long argued that ethical behaviour stems from human reason, empathy, and social needs rather than divine commands. Consider Immanuel Kant's categorical imperative, which urges us to act only according to rules we could will to be universal—a secular framework for morality based on logic and autonomy. Or think about utilitarianism from John Stuart Mill, which evaluates actions by their ability to maximize happiness for the greatest number, drawing from human experience without invoking God.

Even ancient thinkers like Aristotle emphasized virtue ethics rooted in human flourishing, not supernatural authority.

In evolutionary terms, morality likely developed as a survival mechanism. Humans, as social animals, evolved traits like reciprocity and fairness to foster cooperation, long before organized religions emerged. Studies of primates show precursors to moral behaviour, such as empathy and conflict resolution, suggesting these are innate rather than divinely instilled. Secular humanists build on this, asserting that we can derive ethics from reason and compassion alone. For example, the Golden Rule—"treat others as you would like to be treated"—appears in many cultures, including non-religious ones, and serves as a universal moral guide without needing a deity.Critics like C.S. Lewis claimed that without an objective standard from God, morality becomes subjective and arbitrary. Yet, objective morality can be grounded in human well-being and rational principles. If an action causes unnecessary harm, it's wrong—not because a holy book says so, but because it undermines the social contract that allows societies to thrive. In Canada, our Charter of Rights and Freedoms embodies this secular morality, protecting individual liberties through legal and philosophical reasoning, not religious fiat. Surveys show that non-religious Canadians are just as moral as their religious counterparts, often prioritizing equality and harm reduction in ways that align with progressive values, but conservatives can adapt this to emphasize personal accountability.

Building on this, conservative principles themselves do not require religion to hold firm. Core tenets like limited government, free markets, and individual liberty can stand on secular foundations. Edmund Burke, often called the father of modern conservatism, argued for preserving traditions based on practical wisdom and historical experience, not divine mandate. In Canada, conservatism has emphasized decentralization, lower taxes, and resource development—ideas rooted in economic rationality rather than faith. Fiscal conservatism, for instance, promotes balanced budgets and reduced debt to ensure prosperity for future generations, drawing from evidence-based economics, not biblical parables.

Personal freedom, a hallmark of conservatism, aligns with more secular philosophies emphasizing autonomy. Atheist conservatives like Charles Cooke argue that skepticism and hostility to dogma inform both their non-belief and their politics, favouring limited government to avoid overreach.

Traditional values such as family and community can be upheld through cultural norms and education, without religious enforcement. In fact, secular conservatives point out that principles like national sovereignty and strong borders stem from pragmatic concerns about security and identity, not theological imperatives.

Some might argue that religion provides a unifying force for conservatives, as seen in the U.S. Republican Party's success with evangelical voters. But in Canada, this model has not translated well; attempts to import American-style religious conservatism have faltered due to our cultural differences.

Tying conservatism to religion risks hypocrisy, as when faith leaders endorse policies that seem to contradict compassionate teachings, like harsh immigration stances. By decoupling, conservatives can avoid such pitfalls and focus on conclusive, evidence-driven arguments.

Recent discussions on platforms like X underscore this tension. Users have noted how religious elements in conservatism can lead to bigotry or economic harm, advocating for a stricter separation of church and state. Others highlight the irony of conservatives prioritizing foreign religious communities over Canada's Christian heritage, yet failing to recognize that secular principles could bridge these divides. Even Conservative leaders like Pierre Poilievre have defended religious freedoms, but debates over certain bills show how religious exemptions can complicate secular governance.

In embracing a less religious stance, Canadian conservatives would not abandon values but refine them for a broader audience. This means promoting morality through reason—teaching empathy and responsibility in schools, encouraging community service without proselytizing, and crafting policies that respect diverse beliefs while upholding universal ethics. Feel the empowerment in knowing that your principles are chosen freely, not imposed by faith. This approach invites you to contribute to a stronger, more united conservatism.Ultimately, separating church from conservatism is about renewal. It allows the movement to evolve, attract new voices, and address pressing issues like economic inequality and climate resilience with clear-eyed pragmatism. Religion can remain a personal guide for many, but in politics, it should not dictate the agenda. By doing this, conservatives can reclaim their role as defenders of Canadian promise—practical, inclusive, and forward-looking. Let us move toward this future together, where conservatism stands tall on its own strengths, unburdened by religious ties. The result will be a more persuasive, enduring force in our democracy.