Social conservatism in the United States

Social conservatism in the United States is a political ideology focused on the preservation of traditional values and beliefs. It focuses on a concern with moral and social values which proponents of the ideology see as degraded in modern society by liberalism.[1] In the United States, one of the largest forces of social conservatism is the Christian right.[2]

This article is part of a series on
Conservatism
in the United States
Schools
Principles
History
Intellectuals
Politicians
Jurists
Commentators
Activists
Works
Parties
Active

Defunct
Think tanks
Other organizations
Economics

Gun rights

Identity politics

Nationalism

Religion

Watchdog groups

Youth/student groups

Miscellaneous

Other
Media
Newspapers

Journals

TV channels

Websites

Other
Variants and movements
See also

Social conservatives in the United States generally take fundamentalist, familialist, moralist stances on social issues. This is exemplified by their opposition to abortion, opposition to feminism, support for traditional family values, opposition to pornography, support for abstinence-only sex education, opposition to LGBT rights, support for school prayer, support for school vouchers, support for Sunday blue laws, opposition to gambling, and opposition to recreational drug use, among others.[3][4][5]

As many of them are religious, especially Christian fundamentalists, social conservatives push for a focus on Christian traditions as a guiding force for the country on social issues.[6] This includes advocacy for the presence of religion within the public sphere, such as the display of Judeo-Christian statuary in general and especially during Christmastide and Eastertide, as well as supporting the presence of religion in the education system, along with backing parochial schools, as social conservatives believe that "religion is the firmest foundation for the moral development that students need to become productive, law-abiding citizens."[7][8]

As a term, social conservatism describes conservative stances on socio-cultural issues such as abortion, same-sex marriage, and school prayer as opposed to what is termed social liberalism (cultural liberalism).[9][10] A social conservative in this sense is closer to the meaning of cultural conservatism than the broader European social conservatism and may hold various different views on fiscal policy.[11]

Views

Opposition to abortion
Students at the March for Life in Washington, D.C. in 2017
Main article: United States anti-abortion movement

The United States anti-abortion movement opposes induced abortion on moral and religious grounds and supports its legal prohibition or restriction. Social conservatives supported the overturning of Roe v. Wade and often use the term "pro-life" as a euphemism for opposition to legal abortion.[12] These beliefs are often based on the argument of "fetal personhood".[13][14] Personhood arguments focus on giving a fetus the status of a person which then entitles them to the right to life.[15] Anti-abortion beliefs tend to be associated with conservative Christian groups, especially the Catholic Church.[13]

Opposition to feminism

Social conservatives often oppose feminism, believing that men and women are fundamentally different and their traditional gender roles in society should be maintained. They often promote women's traditional roles as homemakers and caregivers, discouraging women from participating in the workforce, government, or military.[16] A number of social conservatives favor complementarianism with respect to gender roles.[17]

Social conservatives often blame feminism for many social problems ailing American families. They hold that feminism in modern times has created an upsurge in the non-married population, undermined male authority in families, and contributed to the decline of the traditional family. Many cite the declining birth rate due to legalized abortion.[18] Others have cited the rising rate of single mother families due to rising rates of divorce and out-of-wedlock births, and the resulting psychological and economic toll on children. Children of single or divorced parents are more likely to suffer from poverty and to be incarcerated for behavioral problems.[19]

Support for sexual morality

Ever since the sexual revolution in 1960s United States, sexual ethics have been a point of contention in the culture war between social conservatives and liberals. Social conservatives with familialist leanings call on the government to exert moral leadership over sexual mores and actively promote family values.[20] They stress the sanctity of marriage and childbirth, blaming social liberalism for the rise in casual sex, premarital sex, masturbation, out-of-wedlock births, teenage pregnancy, sexually transmitted infections, and pornography ever since the mid-20th century.[21]

Opposition to pornography

Opposition to pornography is a traditional stance of social conservatives in the United States. Many blame pornography for corrupting children, encouraging sexual violence against women, promoting casual sex, and destroying marriages.[22] Many conservative Christians oppose pornography on the basis of biblical teachings equating lust with adultery.[23]

The National Center on Sexual Exploitation, formerly known as Morality in Media, is a socially conservative organization that advances the movement against pornography.[21][24]

Support for abstinence-only sex education

Social conservatives are concerned with the moral education and possibly age-inappropriate information children receive from sex education classes in public schools. They prefer abstinence-only sex education for its compatibility with traditional Christian ethics regarding chastity and the sanctity of marriage. Abstinence-only sex education teaches that sex is limited to the bounds of marriage, and that premarital sex is unacceptable. Conversely social conservatives oppose comprehensive sex education as it teaches allegedly morally questionable concepts such as birth control, which they believe leads to premarital sex, sexually transmitted infections, and teenage pregnancy.[25][26] The wearing of purity rings among unmarried women is encouraged by social conservatives in order to preserve traditional Christian notions regarding human sexuality.[27]

Opposition to same-sex marriage

Social conservatism opposes same-sex marriage, civil unions, LGBT adoption, and other LGBT rights, as homosexuality goes against fundamental Christian teachings that marriage is between a man and a woman. Social conservatives often believe that homosexuality is abnormal, that the recognition of same-sex unions will promote homosexuality in society, and that children are raised better by opposite-sex couples.[28] Social conservatives are skeptical of the legalization of same-sex marriage, supporting instead laws such as the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) which defined marriage as a union between a man and a woman. Some are more tolerant of civil unions than same-sex marriage, but many oppose homosexual relations of any form.[29] While social conservatives sometimes support basic LGBT rights, they are concerned with "normalizing" same-sex relationships through the institution of marriage. Some conservatives support same-sex marriage, such as Log Cabin Republicans.[26]

Opposition to transgender rights

Social conservatism opposes transgender rights, as it goes against traditional gender roles prescribing adherence to one's biological sex. It opposes allowing transgender people to use their preferred gender identity's pronouns, names, bathrooms, and locker rooms. It also opposes recognition of non-binary genders.[30]

In modern times the relationship between Christianity and transgender people has been strained, as most churches require their members to adhere to what they believe to be their "God-given" gender.[31] Many Christian denominations denounce transsexuality and prohibit transgender people from marrying.[32]

Support for school prayer and creationism

Social conservatism supports school prayer, which has been banned in public schools ever since a series of 1960s Supreme Court decisions such as Engel v. Vitale. Social conservatives have continued to attack the Supreme Court, blaming these decisions for pushing Christianity out of America's mainstream culture.[33][34]

Many social conservatives, mainly Christian fundamentalists, believe that creationism or intelligent design should be taught in public schools in place of evolution. More moderate conservatives support the teaching of creationism alongside evolution, specifically promoting theistic evolution, in which God is regarded as guiding evolution.[35]

In public schools, social conservatives have supported classes on "The Bible in History and Literature" (cf. National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools).[36]

Support for school vouchers
Resurrection Lutheran School, a Christian parochial school of the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod (WELS) in Rochester.

Peter S. Wenz explains the support of school vouchers, writing: "Social conservatives favor vouchers because they allow religion to be taught in government-funded schools, and they think religion is the firmest foundation for the moral development that students need to become productive, law-abiding citizens."[37]

Social conservatives thus strongly support funding for parochial schools, especially Christian schools.[38]

Support for accommodationism
Chick-fil-A, an American fast food chain, closes on Sundays in keeping with Sunday Sabbatarian principles–a practice widely praised by social conservatives.[39][40]
Further information: Accommodationism and Blue law

Social conservatives are accommodationists who often oppose secularism, state atheism, and moral relativism, viewing them as threats to the nation's Christian character. They hold that the Establishment Clause solely prevents the establishment of a state Church nationally, not public acknowledgements of God nor "developing policies that encourage general religious beliefs that do not favor a particular sect and are consistent with the secular government's goals."[41][42] Such Judeo-Christian heritage includes, for example, the national motto "In God We Trust", the courtroom oath "So help me God", the supplication which begins court sessions "God save the United States and this Honorable Court", "one nation under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance, Congressional prayer, a National Day of Prayer and Thanksgiving, among others.[43]

Notwithstanding, socially conservatives Justices in the United States such as Clarence Thomas have argued that the Establishment Clause's purpose was to prevent federal interference with the established Churches of the states within the Union and that the Constitution does not prevent the establishment of state churches with respect to the states (cf. Federalism).[44]

Social conservatives appeal to Christian nationalism, supporting the idea that the United States was founded as a Christian nation.[3] As such, social conservatives in the United States support Sunday blue laws, which are consistent with Sunday Sabbatarian principles, thus favoring legislation that prohibits Sunday trading (cf. Lord's Day Alliance); social conservatives also back the presence of Judeo-Christian monuments and statues in the public square.[9][45][46] In the same vein, social conservatives support regular church attendance and participation in Sunday School.[8][47]

Opposition to drugs

Social conservatives in the United States have maintained an opposition to drug usage on moral grounds.[37] They have historically supported the temperance movement and the war on drugs.[9][48]

Opposition to gambling

Social conservatives are opposed to gambling, viewing it as immoral.[4][49] As such, social conservatives have rallied to prevent casinos from opening in areas where they are numerically in strength, citing that gambling is opposed to family values.[50] The Woman's Christian Temperance Union, one of the oldest organizations espousing social conservatism, advanced the argument that "communities with casinos suffer higher rates of home foreclosures, financial distress, and domestic violence", thus calling for people to oppose gambling.[51]

History
A temperance fountain erected by the Woman's Christian Temperance Union in 1929 in Sussex County, Delaware.

The Woman's Christian Temperance Union in the 19th and 20th centuries became a strong force for social conservatism, advancing the temperance movement in the United States.[52][53]

The 1897 Constitution of the National Reform Association, one of the oldest organizations espousing social conservatism in the United States, with a focus on introducing a Christian amendment to the U.S. Constitution, expressed alarm at what they viewed as:[54]

Perceiving the subtle and persevering attempts which are made to prohibit the reading of the Bible in our Public Schools, to overthrow our Sabbath laws, to corrupt the Family, to abolish the Oath, Prayer in our National and State Legislatures, Days of Fasting and Thanksgiving, and other Christian features of our institutions, and so to divorce the American Government from all connection with the Christian religion; Viewing with grave apprehension in our politics, the legal sanction of the liquor traffic, and the disregard of moral and religious character in those who are exalted to high places in the nation.[54]

The 1960s saw a surge in grassroots social conservative activism in response to the successes of liberal politics in changing American culture. Democrats continued to put forward increasingly liberal policy ideas that ran counter to the beliefs of many conservative Americans which mobilized them to protect their interests. Some social conservatives supported candidates such as Barry Goldwater in the 1964 Republican Party presidential primaries. There was a rise of social conservatism that advocated a strong moral code and increased religious authority.[55]

Historians have pointed to the 1970s as a turning point where "a vast shift toward social and political conservatism" really began. Meg Jacobs and Julian E. Zelizer argue that this period saw an increase an activism and concern with personal and social issues which lead to a growth of social conservatism.[56] There are multiple theories on the growth of social conservatism in this period. Some of the possible reasons or combination of reasons for this phenomenon are the backlash to the Vietnam War, the expanded conversation on civil rights, the economic changes in the United States and the overall changes in culture in this period.[57] Some commentators refer to social conservatism and renewed conservative grassroots activism as a reaction to the counterculture and cultural upheaval of the 1960s–1970s.[58] A notable event regarding social policy in the 1970s was the passage of Roe v. Wade in 1973 which recognized a legal right to abortion.[59]

Starting in the 1980s, Ronald Reagan, a prominent conservative Republican, exemplifies the rise of social conservatives in mainstream politics. Reagan appealed to social conservatives who felt marginalized by the growing liberalization of American culture, calling on the "forgotten man" or "moral majority".[60][61] After the tumultuous period of political and cultural changes in the 1960s–1970s, Reagan's moderate traditionalism appeared as a source of needed stability for many Americans.[62]

Major conservative welfare reform took place in the 1990s. In 1996, the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act (PRWORA) was passed narrowing the benefits of welfare recipients and encouraging work. Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) also came into effect during this period, limiting the time benefits can be received.[63]

Social conservatives again became powerful in American politics in 2001 with the election of socially conservative President George W. Bush. It has been argued that many of Bush's policy decisions were strongly influenced by his religious beliefs.[64] During his time in office, Bush would pass influential conservative social policies such as the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act and support an increase in funding of abstinence-only sex education.[65] While President Bush did not strongly promote anti-abortion policies, he supported the movement through an emphasis on parental rights and focus on strict regulation of taxpayer funding.[66]

Electoral politics

In American politics, the Republican Party is the largest political party with some socially conservative ideals incorporated into its platform. Social conservatives predominantly support the Republican Party, although there are also socially conservative Democrats who break ranks with the party platform. Despite this, there have been instances where the Republican Party's nominee has been considered too socially liberal by social conservatives. This has led to the support of third party candidates from parties such as the Constitution Party, whose philosophies sometimes parallel that of social conservatism.[67] While many social conservatives see third parties as a viable option in such a situation, some high-profile social conservatives see the excessive support of them as dangerous. This fear arises from the possibility of vote splitting.[68] Like any other interest group, social conservatives usually must find a balance between pragmatic electability and ideological principles when supporting candidates.[69]

The American Tea Party movement is generally regarded as fiscally conservatives who tend to avoid social conservative issues.[70] The Tea Party Patriots is officially neutral on social conservatism.[71] While social conservatism tends to emphasize community, faith and family as core values, the Tea Party Patriots identifies its core values as "Fiscal Responsibility, Constitutionally Limited Government, Free Markets".[72] Some branches are opposed to social conservatism.[73] However, independent polls have repeatedly shown that Tea Party supporters are nearly indistinguishable in their views from traditional Republican social conservatives, despite their choice to emphasize economic issues.[74][75][76][77] While not allying itself officially with the Christian conservative movement,[78] members of the Tea Party movement statistically identify with Christianity and social conservatism more often than the general American populace (44%[79] compared to 34%[80] of the population). Some social conservative leaders have criticized the Tea Party movement for "libertarian" and "irreligious" views.[81] Nearly 80% of those in the Tea Party movement are members of the Republican Party.[82]

Notable social conservatives

People

Political parties

Organizations

See also

References
  1. Bell, Jeffrey (2012). The Case for Polarized Politics: Why American Needs Social Conservatism. New York: Encounter Books. pp. 6–10. ISBN 9781594035784 – via Proquest ebrary. The Case for Polarized Politics: Why American Needs Social Conservatism.
  2. Marsden, Lee (December 28, 2012). The Ashgate Research Companion to Religion and Conflict Resolution. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. ISBN 978-1-4094-7128-8. Even within the secular heartlands of Western Europe and the United States religion began to force its way into the political agenda with the emergence of the American Christian Right as a new force in social conservatism in the late 1970s and in the UK with the issue of fatwas calling for the death of British author Salman Rushdie, promoted by the publication of his book The Satanic Verses, which was declared blasphemous by Ayatollah Khomeini, Supreme Leader of Iran, in 1989.
  3. Quantz, Richard A. (January 8, 2016). Sociocultural Studies in Education: Critical Thinking for Democracy. Routledge. p. 137. ISBN 978-1-317-26076-9. Some important narratives appealed to by social conservatives that were not mentioned in Chapter 4 include the America is a Christian Nation narrative discussed earlier; the God Created man as Head of the Family and any other traditional family narrative, such as the Evils of Drugs and the Evils of Sex narratives; and any of the narrative found in the Bible, especially the Genesis, Jesus Son of God, and the Apocalypse narratives.
  4. Chambers, Kerry (January 1, 2011). Gambling for Profit: Lotteries, Gaming Machines, and Casinos in Cross-national Focus. University of Toronto Press. p. 14. ISBN 978-1-4426-4189-1. Historically, Protestant evangelicals, traditionalists, and social conservatives have condemned gambling as immoral and attempted to exert social-norm pressures on others.
  5. Thompson, Michael (2007). Confronting the New Conservatism: The Rise of the Right in America. NYU Press. pp. 2–3. ISBN 9780814782996.
  6. Marietta, Morgan (2012). A Citizen's Guide to American Ideology: Conservatism and Liberalism in Contemporary Politics. New York: Routledge. p. 32. ISBN 9781136593659.
  7. Wenz, Peter S. (February 10, 2012). Beyond Red and Blue: How Twelve Political Philosophies Shape American Debates. MIT Press. p. 7. ISBN 978-0-262-26127-2. Social conservatives favor vouchers because they allow religion to be taught in government-funded schools, and they think religious is the firmest foundation for the moral development that students need to become productive, law-abiding citizens.
  8. Quantz, Richard A. (January 8, 2016). Sociocultural Studies in Education: Critical Thinking for Democracy. Routledge. ISBN 978-1-317-26075-2. Social conservatives tend to advocate for abstinence education, church attendance, prayer in school, public Christmas displays, patriotism, the military, and gun rights. ... Whereas religion is considered to be in the private realm, social conservatives often argue that the cultural history of the United States makes it perfectly legal to allow some aspects of religion to move into the public sphere. Primarily they advocate the public space be open to the display and expectations of broad Judaic-Christian traditions and often specifically Christian traditions.
  9. Rozell, Mark J.; Wilcox, Clyde (November 2, 2017). God at the Grassroots 2016: The Christian Right in American Politics. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield. ISBN 978-1-5381-0893-2.
  10. Walmer, Daniel (July 13, 2017). "Lebanon women's group still fighting against alcohol". Lebanon Daily News. Archived from the original on May 15, 2021. Retrieved October 14, 2020.
  11. Chideya, Farai (2004). "The Red and the Blue: A Divided America". Trust: Reaching the 100 Million Missing Voters and Other Selected Essays. Soft Skull Press. pp. 33–46. ISBN 9781932360264.
  12. "Definition of PRO-LIFE". www.merriam-webster.com. Archived from the original on July 28, 2022. Retrieved April 6, 2022.
  13. Farrell, Courtney (2010). The Abortion Debate. ABDO Publishing Company. pp. 6–7. ISBN 9781617852640.
  14. Schultz, Jeffrey D.; Van Assendelft, Laura A. (1999). Encyclopedia of women in American politics. The American political landscape (1 ed.). Greenwood Publishing Group. p. 195. ISBN 1-57356-131-2.
  15. Seipel, Peter (2014). "Is There Sufficient Common Ground to Resolve the Abortion Debate?". The Journal of Value Inquiry. 48 (3): 517–31. doi:10.1007/s10790-014-9436-y. S2CID 145389689.
  16. Kimmel, Michael (2004). "Antifeminism". In Kimmel, Michael; Aronson, Amy (eds.). Men and masculinities a social, cultural, and historical encyclopedia. Santa Barbara, California: ABC-CLIO. pp. 35–37. ISBN 978-1-57607-774-0.
  17. Giles, Kevin (October 19, 2018). What the Bible Actually Teaches on Women. Wipf and Stock Publishers. p. 40. ISBN 978-1-5326-3368-3.
  18. "Total Fertility Rate of the United States, History plus Forecast". The Frederick S. Pardee Center for International Futures. University of Denver. Archived from the original on February 22, 2014. Retrieved April 26, 2012.
  19. Snowdon, Stacey (1997). "DIVORCE AND ITS EFFECTS ON CHILDREN". Advocates for Children program, College Park Scholars, University of Maryland. Archived from the original on March 30, 2022. Retrieved November 14, 2011.
  20. Blau, Joel; Abramovitz, Mimi (2010). The Dynamics of Social Welfare Policy. Oxford University Press. p. 169. ISBN 978-0-19-538526-7.
  21. Lewis, Andrew R. (2017). The Rights Turn in Conservative Christian Politics: How Abortion Transformed the Culture Wars. Cambridge University Press. p. 54.
  22. Hammer, Josh (December 11, 2019). "Porn Is Not a Blessing of Liberty". First Things. Archived from the original on March 14, 2022. Retrieved October 14, 2020.
  23. "Bible Verses about Pornography". biblestudytools.com. Archived from the original on March 31, 2022. Retrieved November 20, 2021.
  24. Gold, Michael (March 28, 2018). "Walmart Pulls Cosmo From Checkout. Plus! Guess Who's Claiming Victory". The New York Times. Archived from the original on May 4, 2022. Retrieved April 25, 2020.
  25. Josephson, Jyl J. (2016). Rethinking Sexual Citizenship. SUNY Press. ISBN 978-1-4384-6047-5. From the perspective of social conservatives, the grant requirements ensure that organizations that support abstinence-only and conservative sexual morality are provided with funding under the program.
  26. Luker, Kristin (2006). When Sex Goes to School. New York: Norton. pp. 101, 112.
  27. Fantz, Ashley Fantz (May 31, 2005). "Pledging their purity, with fingers crossed". The Post-Star. Archived from the original on October 14, 2020. Retrieved October 14, 2020.
  28. Cline, Austin (July 16, 2017). "Common Arguments Against Gay Marriage". Archived from the original on July 9, 2022. Retrieved November 20, 2021.
  29. Dombrink, John (2012). "After the Culture War? Shifts and Continuities in American Conservatism". Canadian Review of American Studies. 42 (3): 301–21. doi:10.1353/crv.2012.0018. S2CID 143729347.
  30. Emanuella Grinberg (May 13, 2016). "White House issues guidance on transgender bathrooms". CNNPolitics.com. Archived from the original on May 16, 2016.
  31. Winfield, Nicole (June 10, 2019). "Vatican rejects gender change to alarm of LGBT Catholics". Boston Globe. Archived from the original on July 21, 2022. Retrieved March 16, 2022.
  32. Norton, John (January 14, 2003). "Vatican says 'sex-change' operation does not change person's gender". Catholic News Service. Archived from the original on June 7, 2011. Retrieved March 16, 2022.
  33. Clyde Wilcox (2018). Onward Christian Soldiers?: The Religious Right in American Politics. Taylor & Francis. p. 96. ISBN 9780429974533.
  34. Glenn H. Utter; James L. True (2004). Conservative Christians and Political Participation: A Reference Handbook. ABC-CLIO. pp. 51–53. ISBN 9781851095131.
  35. Ciment, James (March 26, 2015). Postwar America: An Encyclopedia of Social, Political, Cultural, and Economic History. Routledge. p. 513. ISBN 9781317462354. Throughout the twentieth century, many evangelicals accepted theistic evolution ... Some Christian right organizations supported the teaching of creationism, along with evolution, in public schools.
  36. Scharrer, Gary (July 19, 2008). "Schools in Texas get OK for elective Bible course". Houston Chronicle. Retrieved October 14, 2020. Local school districts got a green light Friday to offer high school students an elective Bible course ... The argument focused on legislative intent. In the end, the board's coalition of social conservatives prevailed, 10-5.
  37. Wenz, Peter S. (February 10, 2012). Beyond Red and Blue: How Twelve Political Philosophies Shape American Debates. MIT Press. p. 7, 91. ISBN 978-0-262-26127-2. Social conservatives find happiness on drugs morally despicable.
  38. Glenn, Brian J.; Teles, Steven M. (2009). Conservatism and American Political Development. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-970601-3.
  39. Page, Benjamin I.; Seawright, Jason; Lacombe, Matthew J. (December 21, 2018). Billionaires and Stealth Politics. University of Chicago Press. p. 78. ISBN 978-0-226-58626-7. The Chick-Fil-A boycott was counterbalanced by a movement of social conservatives supporting the restaurant chain.
  40. Grem, Darren E. (2016). The Blessings of Business: How Corporations Shaped Conservative Christianity. Oxford University Press. p. 122. ISBN 978-0-19-992797-5. By the 1980s, Chick-fil-A was so unique among fast-food restaurants that its Sunday closing policy was the equivalent of a totem for conservative evangelicals, a symbol that represented the proper posture that conservative people of faith could and should hold toward corporate culture or American society in general.
  41. Warren A. Nord. Does God Make a Difference?. Oxford University Press. First Amendment Politics: At the risk of oversimplifying a very complicated situation, I suggest that conservative justices tend to favor a weak reading of both the Free Exercise and Establishment clause, while liberals tend to favor strong readings. That is, conservative justices have been less concerned about the dangers of establishment and less concerned to protect free exercise rights, particularly of religious minorities. Liberals, by contrast, have been opposed to any possibility of a religious establishment and they have been relatively more concerned to protect the free exercise rights of minorities.
  42. Robert Devigne. Recasting Conservatism: Oakeshott, Strauss, and the Response to Postmodernism. Yale University Press. Conservatives claim that liberals misinterpret the establishment and free exercise clauses of the First Amendment. They point to the opinion written for the Supreme Court by Hugo Black in Everson v. Board of Education: "The 'establishment of religion' clause of the First Amendment means at least this: neither a state nor a Federal government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions or prefer one religion over another." The establishment clause, conservatives insist, precludes the national state from promoting any religious denomination but does not prohibit state governments and local communities from developing policies that encourage general religious beliefs that do not favor a particular sect and are consistent with the secular government's goals.
  43. ABA Journal Sep 1962. September 1962. Much more recently, in 1952, speaking through Mr. Justice Douglas in Zorach v. Clauson, 343 U.S. 306, 313, the Supreme Court repeated the same sentiments, saying: We are a religious people whose institutions presuppose a Supreme Being. Mr. Justice Brewer in the Holy Trinity case, supra, mentioned many of these evidences of religion, and Mr. Justice Douglas in the Zorach case referred to ... [P]rayers in our legislative halls; the appeals to the Almighty in the messages of the Chief Executive; the proclamation making Thanksgiving Day a holiday; "So help me God" in our courtroom oaths – these and ... other references to the Almighty ... run through our laws, our public rituals, our ceremonies ... the supplication with which the Court opens each session: "God save the United States and this Honorable Court" (312–313). To this list may be added tax exemption of churches, chaplaincies in the armed forces, the "Pray for Peace" postmark, the widespread observance of Christmas holidays, and, in classrooms, singing the fourth stanza of America which is prayer invoking the protection of God, and the words "in God is our trust" as found in the National Anthem, and the reciting of the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag, modified by an Act of Congress of June 14, 1954, to include the words "under God".
  44. Drakeman, Donald L. (2010). Church, State, and Original Intent. Cambridge University Press. p. 232. ISBN 978-0-521-11918-4. The more common version of the enhanced federalism argument relates to the possibility voiced by Justice Clarence Thomas that there is something about the establishment clause that "resists incorporation." This argument has been advance in a variety of ways, but the basic point is that the First Amendment was specifically designed to protect the established churches in the states from federal interference. That Congress should make no law "respecting" an establishment of religion is thus read as forbidding laws on the subject matter of religious establishments in the states.
  45. Moore, James; Slater, Wayne (September 5, 2006). The Architect: Karl Rove and the End of the Democratic Party. Crown. p. 82. ISBN 978-0-307-35264-4.
  46. Griffith, Nancy Snell; Raynal, Charles E. (September 12, 2016). Presbyterians in South Carolina, 1925–1985: Mid-Century Change in Historic Denominations. Wipf and Stock Publishers. p. 66. ISBN 978-1-4982-3772-7.
  47. Boyer, Paul (1992). Urban Masses and Moral Order in America, 1820-1920. Harvard University Press. p. 38. ISBN 978-0-674-93110-7.
  48. Jackson, Hardy (October 29, 2008). "How Alabama regulates alcohol: a history". The Randolph Leader. The bone-dry churches and social conservatives railed against repeal. One Methodist Bishop declared that only "the rakes, the roves, the prostitutes, (and) the brothel keepers" were for it.
  49. Mayer, Russell K. (March 6, 2014). Taking Action on Internet Gambling: Federal Policymaking 1995–2011. Lexington Books. p. 56. ISBN 978-0-7391-8066-2. ...of conservative ideology, whereby social conservatives oppose the morally questionable activity of Internet gambling, combined with liberal ideological beliefs about freedom from government interference in the personal realm.
  50. Schulte, Grant (October 5, 2020). "Big-name conservatives rally against Nebraska casino measure". Associated Press. Retrieved October 14, 2020.
  51. Einwechter, Florence (2015). "The Casino Industry - "What Harm Does It Do?"" (PDF). Woman's Christian Temperance Union. Archived (PDF) from the original on October 15, 2020. Retrieved October 14, 2020.
  52. Tyrrell, Ian (March 19, 2014). Woman's World/Woman's Empire: The Woman's Christian Temperance Union in International Perspective, 1880-1930. UNC Press Books. p. 178. ISBN 978-1-4696-2080-0.
  53. Valverde, Mariana (January 1, 2008). The Age of Light, Soap, and Water: Moral Reform in English Canada, 1885-1925. University of Toronto Press. p. 58. ISBN 978-0-8020-9595-4.
  54. Wylie, Richard Cameron (1901). Our System of Public Education: Is it Christian Or Secular?. The Christian Statesman.
  55. McGirr, Lisa (2001). Suburban Warriors: The Origins of the New American Right. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton. 150
  56. Jacobs, Meg; Zelizer, Julian E. (2008). "Swinging Too Far to the Left" (PDF). Journal of Contemporary History. 43 (4): 683–93. doi:10.1177/0022009408095423. S2CID 155052711. Archived (PDF) from the original on March 7, 2021. Retrieved July 20, 2019 – via Sage.
  57. Schulman, Bruce; Zelizer, Julian (2008). Rightward Bound: Making America Conservative in the 1970s. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. p. 3. ISBN 9780674027572.
  58. Robin, Corey (2010). "Conservatism and counterrevolution". Raritan. 30 (1): 1–17 – via ProQuest.
  59. Di Mauro, Diane; Joffe, Carole (2007). "The Religious Right and the Reshaping of Sexual Policy: An Examination of Reproductive Rights and Sexuality Education". Sexuality Research and Social Policy. 4 (1): 67–92. doi:10.1525/srsp.2007.4.1.67. S2CID 19893992.
  60. McGirr, p. 216
  61. McGirr, p. 214
  62. Troy, Gil (2013). Politics and Society in Modern America: Morning in America: How Ronald Reagan Invented the 1980s. Princeton University Press. ISBN 9781400849307.
  63. Weicher, John (2001). "Reforming welfare: The next policy debates". Society. 38 (2): 16–20. doi:10.1007/s12115-001-1035-4. S2CID 144478190.
  64. Ashbee, Edward (2007). The Bush Administration, Sex and the Moral Agenda. Manchester University Press, Oxford University Press. p. 2. ISBN 9781847796424.
  65. Ashbee, p. 112.
  66. Ashbee, p. 212
  67. "huffingtonpost news story on NY23". Huffingtonpost.com. October 29, 2009. Retrieved March 30, 2011.
  68. Drake, Bruce. "Romney tells Tea Party not to split vote". Politicsdaily.com. Retrieved March 30, 2011.
  69. "Third Party Alternative to McCain". CBS News. February 14, 2008. Retrieved June 28, 2020.
  70. Ben Smith. "Tea parties stir evangelicals' fears". Politico.Com. Retrieved March 30, 2011.
  71. Zernike, Kate (March 12, 2010). "Tea Party Avoids Divisive Social Issues". The New York Times.
  72. "Mission Statement and Core Values". Tea Party Patriots. Archived from the original on March 28, 2011. Retrieved March 30, 2011.
  73. "» Tea Party Leaders Release Letter Urging House and Senate GOP to Avoid Social Issues". Goproud.org. November 23, 2010. Archived from the original on August 3, 2011. Retrieved March 30, 2011.
  74. "Tea Party and Religion". Pewforum.org. Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life. February 23, 2011. Archived from the original on June 17, 2013. Retrieved March 30, 2011.
  75. Siegel, Elyse (June 2, 2010). "More Than Half Of Tea Party Supporters Say Gays And Lesbians Have Too Much Political Power (POLL)". The Huffington Post. Retrieved July 1, 2010.
  76. New poll looks at tea party views toward minorities The Seattle Times; June 1, 2010
  77. "'Tea party' groups plan Arizona rally against illegal immigration" Archived February 8, 2017, at the Wayback Machine, The Washington Post, August 11, 2010
  78. "Survey – Religion and the Tea Party in the 2010 Elections". Public Religion Research Institute. Retrieved January 31, 2016.
  79. Przybyla, Heidi (March 26, 2010). "Tea Party Advocates Who Scorn Socialism Want a Government Job". Bloomberg News. Archived from the original on November 9, 2020. Retrieved March 28, 2010.
  80. Barry A. Kosmin and Ariela Keysar (2009) "American Religious Identification Survey (ARIS) 2008" Archived April 7, 2009, at the Wayback Machine Trinity College, Hartford, Connecticut, US; Retrieved April 1, 2009 (PDF)
  81. Ben Smith. "Tea parties stir evangelicals' fears". Politico.Com. Archived from the original on May 11, 2011. Retrieved March 30, 2011.
  82. "Tea Party Supporters Overlap Republican Base". Gallup.com. July 2, 2010. Archived from the original on July 1, 2017. Retrieved March 30, 2011.
  83. "'Transgender Black Marxists' seek to overthrow U.S., Trump backer Michele Bachmann says". NBC News. Archived from the original on February 16, 2022. Retrieved February 16, 2022.
  84. Buchanan, Patrick 'Pat' Joseph (August 17, 1992). "Republican National Convention Speech". Patrick 'Pat' Joseph Buchanan. Archived from the original on October 12, 2006.
  85. Zernike, Kate (January 30, 2005). "Buzzwords; Hello, Synergy, Begone, Crisis". The New York Times. Archived from the original on November 9, 2012.
  86. Israel, Josh (August 10, 2020). "6 things Jerry Falwell Jr. got away with before his unzipped pants took him down". The American Independent. Archived from the original on August 25, 2020.
  87. Henderson, Kay (June 25, 2011). "Gingrich defends campaign strategy; criticizes gay marriage". Reuters. Archived from the original on February 16, 2022. Retrieved February 16, 2022.
  88. Denton, Robert E. (June 14, 2010). Studies of Identity in the 2008 Presidential Campaign. Lexington Books. p. 130. ISBN 978-0-7391-4104-5. ...and much of his support base then switched to the other social conservative, Mike Huckabee.
  89. Harnden, Toby (2010). "The most influential US conservatives: 20-1". Daily Telegraph. ISSN 0307-1235. Archived from the original on March 22, 2020. Retrieved August 14, 2018.
  90. "Sarah Palin making rounds among socially conservative groups". Los Angeles Times. February 17, 2011. Archived from the original on December 27, 2019. Retrieved December 27, 2019.
  91. Lee, Tony (May 16, 2010). "A Conservative's Case for Sarah Palin's Genius". The Atlantic.
  92. "Who Wants to Make Sarah Palin the Leader of the Republican Party?". Cato Institute. December 9, 2009.
  93. "Brownback: Social Conservatives 'Pumped' By Palin". NPR.org.
  94. Smith, David (May 21, 2017). "President Mike Pence? Dems should be 'careful what they wish for', experts say". the Guardian. Archived from the original on August 27, 2018. Retrieved August 14, 2018.
  95. "Pat Robertson, conservative evangelist and Christian Coalition founder, dies at 93". NBC News. June 8, 2023. Retrieved September 27, 2023.
  96. Perry, L. (August 7, 2014). Mitt Romney, Mormonism, and the 2012 Election. Springer. ISBN 978-1-137-36082-3. Santorum, like Bachman, had a consistent record on social conservative issues, which was viewed as an asset.
  97. "Religion and Politics in America" Archived November 22, 2020, at the Wayback Machine Morning Edition, NPR October 22, 1996 John Burnett URL accessed 05/09/2006
  98. Critchlow, Donald T. (June 5, 2018). Phyllis Schlafly and Grassroots Conservatism: A Woman's Crusade. Princeton University Press. p. 33. ISBN 978-0-691-18797-6.
  99. Page, Susan; "Analysis: Trump's short, dark and defiant inaugural address" Archived July 17, 2017, at the Wayback Machine, USA Today (January 20, 2017).
  100. Padusniak, Chase (Winter 2015), "Why You Should Vote Third Party", Intercollegiate Review, Intercollegiate Studies Institute, archived from the original on August 21, 2016, retrieved July 21, 2016, For the socially-conservative American who thinks government intervention has some place in the economy, the American Solidarity Party might fit.
  101. McKeen, Leah A D, "Canadian Christian Nationalism?: The Religiosity and Politics of the Christian Heritage Party of Canada" (2015). Theses and Dissertations (Comprehensive). 1740.
  102. Jones, Mark P. (February 24, 2020). Voting and Political Representation in America: Issues and Trends [2 volumes]. ABC-CLIO. p. 497. ISBN 978-1-4408-6085-0.
  103. Micklethwait, John; Wooldridge, Adrian (April 2, 2009). God Is Back: How the Global Revival of Faith Is Changing the World. Penguin Publishing Group. p. 95. ISBN 9781101032411. He also, to litigate on behalf of socially conservative issues, helped in 1994 to foundthe Alliance Defense Fund, which has notched up more than twenty-five victories before the U.S. Supreme Court and hundreds more before the lower court.
  104. Hunter, James Davison (2010). To Change the World: The Irony, Tragedy, and Possibility of Christianity in the Late Modern World. Oxford University Press. p. 122. ISBN 978-0-19-974539-5.
  105. Marcus, Ruth (December 3, 2019). Supreme Ambition: Brett Kavanaugh and the Conservative Takeover. Simon and Schuster. p. 81. ISBN 978-1-9821-2386-4. The leaders of three socially conservative groups—the American Family Association, the American Principles Project, and Liberty Counsel--joined with Jauregui to send a letter to the president pushing for Barrett.
  106. Engdahl, Sylvia (2007). Religious Liberty. Greenhaven Press. ISBN 9780737738551. ... supposed the federal law, as did the socially conservative Becket Fund for Religious Liberty.
  107. Vaughan, Joel D. (June 15, 2009). The Rise and Fall of the Christian Coalition: The Inside Story. Wipf and Stock Publishers. p. 200. ISBN 978-1-62189-212-0. Catholic University's Mark Rozell told The Virginian-Pilot in late 2001 when Pat Robertson resigned as the Coalition's chairman: "Christian Coalition, without a doubt, has been the most successful social conservative organization in this country."
  108. Deckman, Melissa (May 24, 2016). Tea Party Women: Mama Grizzlies, Grassroots Leaders, and the Changing Face of the American Right. NYU Press. p. 26. ISBN 978-1-4798-6642-7.
  109. Rimmerman, Craig A.; Wilcox, Clyde (October 1, 2007). The Politics of Same-Sex Marriage. University of Chicago Press. p. 245. ISBN 9780226720005. In 2003 Ken Connor, president of the Family Research Council, questioned the Republican commitment to fighting for the socially conservative policies that defined the group.
  110. Bennett, Daniel (June 10, 2015). "The Rise of Christian Conservative Legal Organizations". Religion & Politics. Archived from the original on May 6, 2017. Retrieved April 27, 2017.
  111. Gottlieb, Samantha D. (January 2, 2018). Not Quite a Cancer Vaccine: Selling HPV and Cervical Cancer. Rutgers University Press. p. 71. ISBN 978-0-8135-8780-6.
  112. Dumenil, Lynn (2012). The Oxford Encyclopedia of American Social History: Men's-YMCA. Oxford University Press. p. 45. ISBN 978-0-19-974336-0. He launched the Moral Majority, a voter mobilization and lobbying organization, in June 1979, and he also formed the Moral Majority political action committee to raise money for socially conservative congressional candidates.
  113. Gearon, Liam; Prud'homme, Joseph (April 4, 2018). State Religious Education and the State of Religious Life. Wipf and Stock Publishers. p. 2. ISBN 978-1-62564-726-9.
  114. Farmer, Brian (December 18, 2008). American Conservatism: History, Theory and Practice. Cambridge Scholars Publishing. p. 174. ISBN 978-1-4438-0276-5.
  115. Josephson, Burack (September 1, 2004). Fundamental Differences: Feminists Talk Back to Social Conservatives. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. p. 178. ISBN 978-0-585-46378-0. PJI, along with several other California-based social conservative organizations, initiated what they termed a "Parental Opt Out Program," so that parents who wished to could "ensure that their children are not exposed to such controversial and potentially harmful social instruction."
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.