This paper offers an intersectional analysis of the entanglements between gender and religion within far-right populist discourse in Greece, with particular attention to the ways religious narratives, symbols, and moral claims are mobilized in contemporary political contestation. It examines how gender and religion operate not merely as cultural references but as strategic political instruments within populist projects, arguing that dividing mechanisms and the discursive constructions that sustain them are profoundly gendered and frequently legitimated through religiously framed justifications. Drawing on the ideational approach to radical right populism developed by Mudde (2007, 2014) and Pirro (2015), the study analyzes parliamentary debates surrounding two critical legislative moments: the ratification of the Istanbul Convention in 2018 and the legalization of same-sex marriage in 2024. Employing Reinfeldt's (2000) concept of the "ideological square," the analysis explores how far-right populist actors construct moral and political boundaries by framing particular social groups, gender identities, and normative visions of family and nation as existential "threats." Special emphasis is placed on the role of gendered and religious discourse in shaping these boundary-making processes. Through a feminist critical content analysis of parliamentary speech, the paper deconstructs gendered and religiously infused representations articulated within the Greek Parliament. It aims to illuminate the discursive sites where gender and religion intersect and to demonstrate how religiously grounded moral arguments are deployed to legitimize the dividing lines between people, normalize hierarchical gender orders, and contribute to processes associated with democratic backsliding.