About the Pentagon's Revised List of Recognized Religions

The removal of dozens of belief systems probably doesn't violate the First Amendment

I have a list of things I want to touch on, but I’m more than a little behind. I had a work trip last week, and I didn’t have any real downtime after I got back to my hotel each night. If you’ve been following along for a while, you know that I often take things from conversations, something I hear, or questions from friends as the basis for things to write. This one was suggested by a friend.

A friend sent me the story on the Department of Defense’s pared-down list of recognized religions and asked me to “explain how this new category approach doesn’t line up with the free exercise or establishment clauses.” He also asked me to explain “the differences between agnostics and atheists.”

What’s all about? The Pentagon maintains a list of Religious Preference Codes for military personnel.¹ So, a servicemember would select his or her religious preference for administrative purposes. It has a practical purpose, such as religious accommodations, emergency support, and demographic reporting. A list I’ve seen had more than 200 different religious preferences. That list includes many Protestant denominations, “Roman Catholic,” “Islam,” “Judaism,” “Buddhism,” and “Hindu.” It also had some lesser-known or not as widely practiced religions like “Unitarian Universalist,” “Humanist,” “Pagan,” “Wicca,” and “Magick and Spiritualist.” “Atheist” and “Agnostic” were also preferences.

That list was slashed from more than 200 to 21 Christian denominations,² “Agnostic,” “Baha’i,” “Buddhism,” “Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints,” “Hindu,” “Islam,” “Judaism,” “No Religion,” “Other Religions,” and “Sikh.” In total, 31 religions are now recognized by the Department of Defense. There was some initial controversy about the list because the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS) wasn’t listed as a Christian religion. Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) blasted the Pentagon for what he called an “offensive” and “repugnant” move.³ The Department of Defense eventually released an updated list, removing the “Christian” designation from all denominations of the religion.

Although the Pentagon’s overhaul of the Religious Preference Codes strikes me as an exceedingly stupid move,⁴ I’m not convinced the change itself automatically runs afoul of either the Free Exercise Clause or the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. Whether there’s a constitutional problem probably depends less on the existence of the pared-down list and more on what the Pentagon does with it.

Some people have responded, “Who cares? Service members can just select ‘Other Religions.’” I get the argument, but I also think it misses the point. Religion isn’t one-size-fits-all. Different faiths—and even different traditions within the same faith—have different observances, dietary practices, clergy needs, holidays, rituals, and beliefs. If these categories become a shortcut for deciding who gets accommodations, who gets access to religious support, or whose practices are taken seriously, then you start moving into much shakier constitutional territory. A broad administrative bucket may be fine for paperwork, but that doesn’t necessarily mean it works well for actual people.

One thing I did find interesting is that agnosticism remained on the revised list while atheism did not. For clarity, agnosticism generally refers to uncertainty about—or the view that one cannot know—the existence of a deity or deities. Atheism, by contrast, refers to a lack of belief in a higher power or powers. The two aren’t mutually exclusive. Plenty of atheists identify as agnostic atheists—they don’t believe in any higher power, but they also don’t claim certainty or absolute knowledge. If the point of the categories is self-identification, retaining agnosticism while excluding atheism feels a little odd from a classification standpoint.

That said, some of the backlash hasn’t fully landed with me. I don’t consider atheism to be a religion. Personally, I don’t think of humanism as one either, at least not in the way most people use the word religion. That said, institutions don’t always use the term the way ordinary people do. Sometimes they recognize nonreligious belief systems for accommodation purposes and not because they’re declaring them religions, but because people organize meaning, ethics, identity, and community around them in ways that can create similar needs. I’m also not part of a religion or belief system that was removed from the list, so I’m cautious about assuming I know how affected communities view the change.

The stronger criticism of the Pentagon’s decision isn’t that it’s obviously unconstitutional. That’s not to say it’s not unconstitutional. I don’t trust Pete Hegseth, whose brand of evangelicalism is toxic, and I’m not convinced there isn’t some ulterior motive behind this revision because of the growth of Christian nationalism in the conservative base of the Republican Party. Still, in the absence of some ulterior motive, a system can survive constitutional scrutiny and still be bad policy. If the revised categories make it harder to understand or accommodate the military’s actual religious and philosophical diversity, that’s a problem regardless of whether a court would uphold it. Diversity, after all, is shunned these days by those in power.

1. I’ve also seen this referred to as “Faith and Belief Codes” and “Faith Group Codes.”

2. I suppose I should note that this includes an “Other” category.

3. To some degree, I don’t know why anyone who’s a member of LDS would be surprised to see their faith excluded from the rest of Christian denominations. When I was an evangelical Christian, I was told that the LDS is a cult and not Christian. I was told the same about Jehovah’s Witnesses. I was also taught that the “false prophet” would be the Catholic pope. Thankfully, I don’t believe any of this stuff anymore, and I see no reason why LDS shouldn’t be considered a Christian religion.

4. It’s exceedingly stupid because it’s a distraction and another unforced error by the administration.