How do populist leaders operating in sharply different historical, institutional, and cultural contexts deploy religion in politics? Do their strategies share common features and yield comparable political effects? Why do electorates often tolerate—rather than resist—restrictions on rights and institutional checks under populist leaders? Focusing on Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Narendra Modi, and Viktor Orbán, this paper analyzes how religion functions not primarily as belief or identity, but as a symbolic political resource to signal various policies, from refugee acceptance to interest rates. Drawing on a systematic analysis of political discourse, key legislative interventions, and symbolic politics between 2010 and 2026, the study traces how religious narratives are mobilized in debates in select areas, including media regulation, refugee governance, and development policy, to form different coalitions. The comparison shows that by sacralizing the nation, populist leaders recast political conflict as a moral struggle between a virtuous majority and allegedly corrupt, secular, or civilizationally alien opponents. Comparing key speeches and legislative actions, the analysis illustrates how Erdoğan, Modi, and Orban normalize exclusion and legitimise authoritarian practices as necessary responses while eroding electoral legitimacy.