Hillary Clinton Targets Christians

Hillary Clinton’s attempt to silence conservative Christian leaders by accusing them of waging a “war on empathy” spectacularly backfired when those targeted celebrated her attack as a badge of honor, revealing the former presidential candidate’s desperation and disconnect from traditional faith values.

Story Snapshot

Clinton published a lengthy Atlantic op-ed attacking prominent Christian conservatives including Allie Beth Stuckey and Joe Rigney for opposing “toxic empathy”
Targeted leaders responded with pride on social media, viewing Clinton’s criticism as validation they’re effectively countering progressive manipulation
The former Secretary of State positioned herself as a Christian authority while linking conservative views to violence at anti-ICE protests
Clinton’s attack amplified the very voices she sought to diminish, energizing evangelical conservatives who see her piece as proof of leftist overreach

Clinton’s Atlantic Broadside Targets Faith Leaders

On January 30, 2026, Hillary Clinton published an op-ed in The Atlantic titled “MAGA’s War on Empathy,” directly attacking several influential Christian conservative figures. Clinton accused hard-right Christian influencers of rejecting core Christian values like dignity and compassion while promoting dangerous Christian nationalism that threatens democracy. She specifically named Allie Beth Stuckey, author of Toxic Empathy, Joe Rigney, who wrote Leadership and the Sin of Empathy, along with pastors Ben Garrett and Douglas Wilson. Clinton linked their theological positions to violence during Minneapolis anti-ICE protests, including the death of Alex Pretti, attempting to paint conservative immigration enforcement as lacking Christian compassion.

Christian Leaders Celebrate Clinton’s Attack as Validation

Rather than cowering from Clinton’s criticism, the targeted leaders responded with enthusiasm and gratitude. Allie Beth Stuckey declared on her Relatable podcast that “you know you’re over the target” when Clinton dedicates an entire op-ed to attacking your work. Brian Sauvé, a friend of Joe Rigney, posted on X that he had “never been more proud” of his associate. Douglas Wilson responded with characteristic humor, joking about his survival given the alleged fate of Clinton associates. These responses demonstrate how conservative Christians increasingly view mainstream media attacks as confirmation they’re effectively challenging progressive narratives that exploit compassion to advance policies undermining traditional American values and constitutional principles.

The Toxic Empathy Debate Exposes Progressive Manipulation

The controversy centers on a fundamental disagreement about empathy’s proper role in Christian teaching and public policy. Stuckey’s book Toxic Empathy argues progressives weaponize compassion to manipulate Christians into supporting open borders, gender ideology, and other leftist causes that contradict biblical principles. Clinton cited Stuckey’s criticism of Episcopal Bishop Mariann Edgar Budde’s sermon as evidence of attacking Christian values, yet Stuckey had identified the bishop’s message as toxic empathy supporting what she called satanic ideas. This clash reveals how the left demands Christians abandon discernment and critical thinking in favor of emotion-driven policies that produce disastrous consequences for American families and communities facing illegal immigration’s real costs.

Clinton’s attempt to position herself as a Christian authority rings hollow for many believers who note her staunch abortion advocacy and past statements suggesting disdain for religious conservatives. During her 2016 campaign, she endorsed Eric Hoffer’s The True Believer to understand mass movements like Trump supporters, which critics interpreted as revealing contempt for faith-driven voters. The irony of a failed politician who lost to Trump twice now lecturing successful Christian authors and pastors about Jesus’ teachings was not lost on conservative commentators. This episode illustrates the growing disconnect between progressive elites and ordinary Americans of faith who prioritize constitutional freedoms and traditional values over manufactured empathy designed to advance destructive agendas.

Immigration Enforcement Clash Fuels Religious Battle

Clinton’s op-ed emerged amid heightened tensions over immigration enforcement under President Trump’s administration, with violent protests against ICE operations in Minneapolis providing her narrative framework. She attempted to exploit deaths during these confrontations, including Alex Pretti and Renee Good, to portray Trump’s policies as cruel and Christian conservatives as accomplices. However, new evidence revealed Pretti as an anti-ICE activist, undermining Clinton’s victim narrative. Trump had expressed genuine compassion for those harmed during the unrest, contrasting with Clinton’s political exploitation of tragedy. This manipulation exemplifies how progressives weaponize isolated incidents to attack lawful immigration enforcement that protects American citizens from the chaos of open borders.

The backlash against Clinton’s piece demonstrates conservative Christians’ growing sophistication in recognizing and countering leftist narrative warfare. Rather than defensively explaining their positions, targeted leaders confidently reframed the attack as evidence of their effectiveness in exposing progressive tactics. This response energized evangelical conservatives who see the culture war over empathy, immigration, and Christian nationalism as central to preserving American identity and constitutional governance. Clinton’s failed attack inadvertently amplified the very voices she sought to silence, boosting profiles of Stuckey, Rigney, and others among audiences hungry for leaders willing to defend traditional faith against secular progressive encroachment on religious liberty and family values.