On The Craig Bushon Show, we don’t just follow the headlines… we read between the lines to get to the bottom line of what’s really going on.
And when it comes to demographics, religion, and the future of the United States of America, clarity matters more than ever.
Let’s begin with the numbers.
Out of roughly 8.1 billion people on Earth, individuals of predominantly European ancestry represent approximately 13–15 percent of the global population. Asia accounts for nearly 60 percent of humanity. Africa roughly 19 percent — and projected to drive much of this century’s population growth. Europe represents about 9 percent.
Those figures are not political slogans. They are demographic realities.
Religiously, Christianity remains the largest global faith at roughly 2.3 billion adherents. Islam follows at roughly 1.9 billion. Hinduism and Buddhism are regionally concentrated, and secular or unaffiliated populations are growing across much of the West.
In the United States today, approximately 63–65 percent of Americans identify as Christian — down from roughly 85–90 percent in the early 1990s. That decline is driven largely by secularization rather than simply immigration.
So what does this mean for America?
It means we must understand the difference between cultural influence and constitutional structure.
The Founders Understood the Difference
When John Adams wrote in 1798 that “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious People,” he was not drafting theology into federal law. He was recognizing a structural truth: a limited republic depends on citizens capable of self-restraint.
George Washington warned in his Farewell Address that religion and morality are indispensable supports of political prosperity.
The Founders believed virtue sustains liberty.
But they also built something revolutionary:
A government that does not establish religion.
A Constitution that forbids religious tests.
A system where sovereignty flows from “We the People.”
America was founded in a culturally Christian society — but it was constructed as a constitutionally secular republic.
Culturally influenced.
Legally neutral.
That distinction is not weakness. It is genius.
“In God We Trust” — Heritage, Not Theocracy
The phrase “In God We Trust” became the official national motto in 1956 during the Cold War — a symbolic contrast to state-enforced atheism abroad. It reflects America’s moral heritage, not a doctrinal declaration.
You may swear an oath in court — or affirm without invoking God. The legal authority comes from perjury law, not theology.
The American system assumes moral accountability — but enforces civic order through constitutional law.
That line is deliberate.
Religious Law vs. Constitutional Sovereignty
Religious civilizations throughout history have developed legal systems rooted in sacred authority.
Sharia, derived from Islamic jurisprudence, governs aspects of life in some Muslim-majority countries — sometimes including criminal law.
Hindu civilization historically developed Dharmashastra traditions outlining social duty, inheritance, caste structure, and moral codes tied to religious identity.
But here is the key distinction:
Modern India operates under a secular constitution adopted in 1950. Though culturally majority Hindu, it does not enforce ancient religious codes as criminal state law.
That evolution highlights a critical principle:
Sacred tradition may shape culture.
It cannot supersede constitutional law.
The contrast is not between Islam and Christianity.
It is not between Hinduism and the West.
It is between governance models.
In the American system:
• Sovereignty flows from the people.
• Law is created through elected representation.
• Rights are individual and equal.
• Government power is limited and enumerated.
In traditional religious legal systems, authority ultimately derives from divine command or sacred order rather than popular consent.
That is a structural difference — not a theological insult.
And it is that structural difference that makes constitutional supremacy non-negotiable in the United States.
Competing Models of Power
This debate is not abstract. It is geopolitical.
The 21st century is defined by ideological competition between governance models.
Theocratic governance in Iran concentrates ultimate authority in clerical leadership, where civil law must align with Islamic jurisprudence.
Party-authoritarian governance in China places exclusive political control in the Chinese Communist Party, restricting opposition and civil liberties in favor of centralized party authority.
Hybrid nationalist-authoritarian governance in Russia blends formal democratic structures with concentrated executive power and constrained opposition.
Religious-nationalist movements in various regions fuse faith and national identity, arguing that state survival requires religious primacy.
Each of these systems answers one core question differently:
Where does sovereignty reside?
In clerics.
In party leadership.
In national destiny.
In sacred tradition.
In the United States, the answer is singular:
Sovereignty resides in the people — and authority is constrained by the Constitution.
National Security and Internal Cohesion
In an era of hybrid warfare, cyber destabilization, and ideological radicalization, internal unity is not optional. Great powers do not collapse solely from foreign invasion. They weaken when internal coherence erodes.
Parallel loyalties.
Competing legal authorities.
Fragmented civic identity.
Those are vulnerabilities.
This is not about peaceful worship.
It is about whether any system — religious or ideological — claims civil authority above the Constitution.
There is no constitutional space in America for:
• Sharia criminal courts.
• Hindu caste-based legal enforcement.
• Christian dominionist governance.
• Any religious authority claiming civil jurisdiction.
Private religious practice is protected.
Parallel sovereign law is not.
Assimilation: The Civic Covenant
My family came through Ellis Island speaking Italian. They carried culture, faith, and tradition.
But the message from the elders was clear:
You are Americans now.
Learn English.
Embrace the Constitution.
Participate fully in civic life.
Allegiance first. Heritage second.
That is assimilation.
Assimilation does not erase faith.
It does not erase culture.
It requires allegiance to constitutional order.
America absorbed wave after wave of immigrants because one principle held firm:
One law.
One sovereign authority.
One civic covenant.
The Line That Must Hold
America protects religious liberty for Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, atheists — everyone.
But America does not permit religious doctrine to govern civil law.
That line is not intolerance.
It is constitutional survival.
Because in a world of rising authoritarianism and ideological fragmentation, the United States remains rare:
A nation where rights are individual.
Where government is limited.
Where sovereignty flows upward from citizens.
Demographics will shift.
Religious adherence will rise and fall.
Immigration patterns will evolve.
But constitutional supremacy must remain immovable.
We don’t just follow the headlines…
We read between the lines to get to the bottom line of what’s really going on.
And the bottom line is this:
National security begins with allegiance.
One Constitution.
One sovereign authority.
One American covenant.
That line must never move.
Disclaimer
This op-ed discusses constitutional structure, civic assimilation, and national sovereignty. It does not advocate discrimination against any religious group or individual. The United States Constitution protects the free exercise of religion for all Americans. The position articulated here affirms constitutional supremacy over all legal systems and defends equal protection under the law. Peaceful religious practice — including Islam, Hinduism, Christianity, Judaism, and other faith traditions — is protected in the United States so long as it operates within constitutional boundaries.
