2 things can be true at the same time especially when religion has power.

not a dichotomy

Two sides of the same coin.
Frank Wilhoit (not that Frank Wilhoit):

>There is no such thing as liberalism — or progressivism, etc.

>There is only conservatism. No other political philosophy actually exists; by the political analogue of Gresham’s Law, conservatism has driven every other idea out of circulation.

>There might be, and should be, anti-conservatism; but it does not yet exist. What would it be? In order to answer that question, it is necessary and sufficient to characterize conservatism. Fortunately, this can be done very concisely.

>Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit:

>There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.

>There is nothing more or else to it, and there never has been, in any place or time.

>For millenia, conservatism had no name, because no other model of polity had ever been proposed. “The king can do no wrong.” In practice, this immunity was always extended to the king’s friends, however fungible a group they might have been. Today, we still have the king’s friends even where there is no king (dictator, etc.). Another way to look at this is that the king is a faction, rather than an individual.

>As the core proposition of conservatism is indefensible if stated baldly, it has always been surrounded by an elaborate backwash of pseudophilosophy, amounting over time to millions of pages. All such is axiomatically dishonest and undeserving of serious scrutiny. Today, the accelerating de-education of humanity has reached a point where the market for pseudophilosophy is vanishing; it is, as The Kids Say These Days, tl;dr . All that is left is the core proposition itself — backed up, no longer by misdirection and sophistry, but by violence.

(emphasis mine)
It even tracks with the moral foundations theory: social conservatives have a "diverse" morality where moral values of in-group loyalty, respect for authority, and sanctity/purity compromise 'are valued "equally" to' moral values of fairness, care/harm (to others), and liberty.

Organized religion is all about concentrating power and money in the hands of the few. So in this context, the two are the same.