How accurate is it to say that the Religious Right was successful in its aims in
the period 1978 - 1988
During the time period of 1978 - 1988, it can be clearly seen that the political
consensus within America had been changing. Left wing politics was
seemingly less favorable to many, as a result of President Johnson and
Carter. Many on the right perceived previous decades as a catalyst for the
unravelling of society (traditional values were being ignored or tempered
with). The religious right were (like the silent majority) a group of American
citizens who were important when it came down to the matter of voting, but
equally appeasing the group was an important matter. Three themes that will
be analysed in order to assess whether or not the Religious Right were
successful in the aims they had set out to tackle between 1978 - 1988 would
be: their growth of influence in politics, their actions against abortion, the
war on drugs. From this, an analysis shall be made as to how accurate it is to
say that the Religious Right was successful in its aims in the period 1978 -
1988. From a glance, it can be claimed that the Religious Right were
successful in regards to some matters (war on drugs, gaining political
influence), but their ability was limited in regards to fully rolling back the
ruling of Roe V Wade (abortion).
On the one hand, it can be suggested that the Religious Right was successful
to an extent due to their growing political importance. One can make a
comparison to the predecessors of the Religious Right: the silent majority.
Both of said groups hold similar ideals that are based on traditional values
(often these values relate to religious teachings or values, but it is not a
necessity for such link to be evident). It can be argued, that due to the
"chaotic" times under the last few presidents (Carter, Ford and Nixon),
people gradually grew disconent with the idea of the presidency and how
previous leaders would handle situations. The dominance of the Republican
party within the 1980s arguably came around for a few reasons: the poor
performance of the American economy under the Democrat president Jimmy
Carter and the poor management of foreign affairs (Iran Hostage Crisis,
Soviet invasion of Afghanistan). It can be argued that traditional values
resurfaced to the foreground of the political landscape for the same reason
as they did in the case of the silent majority: nostalgia. Historians may be
able to put forward evidence such as: the growth in numbers of
'televangelists' / television evangelists (these were a group of evangelists
who had a position in the media industry. At face value this may seem
simplistic, but media plays a significant part in shaping political discussions
or even viewpoints. People indulge in media in order to obtain information of
some form or another, it would be of no surprise that religion is able to be
promoted through this. It was found that the top 8 televangelists in the year
1980 made $310 million from their own respective programmes that reached
20 million people. The 20 million in the audience expectedly would feel
represented within the media, and understand their value in attempting to
, revive a more traditional way of living), Reagan's campaign was influenced
by this group (like Nixon, Reagan tapped into the current version of the silent
majority and expressed his support for traditional family values, traditional
gender roles and even the rights of unborn children- which is still seen as a
controversial topic to this day). Causes that were supported by the Moral
Majority / Religious Right had $100 million raised by Jerry Falwell, this figure
is said to be significantly higher than what was raised by the Democratic
party. Whilst not every American citizen would have been drawn towards a
right wing ideological standpoint, it can be seen that overall a cultural shift
was evident: even on the left wing this was evident, as traditional
Democratic middle class voters turned to Ronald Reagan within the 1980s,
this group were known as "Reagan Democrats". Although, the point could
equally be made that political rhetoric was being used in order to ensure that
Reagan was not just able to obtain voters during the election, but to secure
supporters for his policies. One study found that a stronger Christian Right
presence in a state was linked to greater public-wide political participation-
this could be for a number of reasons (such as people wishing to reinstate
traditional values, or those who wish to vote against such reformation). A
historian may be able to argue that when the evidence stated above is
analysed, the Religious Right was successful in its growth in the period 1978
- 1988, which of course will allow for its aims to be considered by politicians
and potentially carried out given the nature of the aim. From assessing the
information provided above, it can be said that whilst this was not
necessarily an aim, this facilitated the way for which aims set out by the
religious right could have been carried out.
On the other hand, it can be argued that the Religious Right was not fully
successful in its aims in the period 1978 - 1988 in regards to the rights of
unborn babies / on the matter of abortion. Abortion is a matter surrounded
by great controversy (even to this day, the topic has not become less
sensitive). A traditional standpoint on the matter would argue that a foetus
should be given the same care that a child would, as after conception a child
has been created; a modern / more liberal standpoint on the matter would
suggest that a child only recieves such status after birth has taken place
(although some have become more extreme on the matter and believe that
a born baby can be treated as if it were a foetus). It is to no surprise that the
religious right take the more traditional approach, as they view life as a
sacred concept that must be protected and respected. Whilst the term
abortion may not directly be stated within the bible, many have associated
certain passages with such topic: Whoever takes a human life shall surely be
put to death" Leviticus 24:17, Exodus 20:13 and finally Psalm 139:13-16 to
name just a few. Christians of all denominations agree across the board that
murder of any form is wrong, it is not surprising in the slightest that the idea
of a human being (or potential human being in the eyes of those with more
liberal views) being terminated is not an idea that this group of people stand
for. Historians may be able to put forward evidence such as: Southern
the period 1978 - 1988
During the time period of 1978 - 1988, it can be clearly seen that the political
consensus within America had been changing. Left wing politics was
seemingly less favorable to many, as a result of President Johnson and
Carter. Many on the right perceived previous decades as a catalyst for the
unravelling of society (traditional values were being ignored or tempered
with). The religious right were (like the silent majority) a group of American
citizens who were important when it came down to the matter of voting, but
equally appeasing the group was an important matter. Three themes that will
be analysed in order to assess whether or not the Religious Right were
successful in the aims they had set out to tackle between 1978 - 1988 would
be: their growth of influence in politics, their actions against abortion, the
war on drugs. From this, an analysis shall be made as to how accurate it is to
say that the Religious Right was successful in its aims in the period 1978 -
1988. From a glance, it can be claimed that the Religious Right were
successful in regards to some matters (war on drugs, gaining political
influence), but their ability was limited in regards to fully rolling back the
ruling of Roe V Wade (abortion).
On the one hand, it can be suggested that the Religious Right was successful
to an extent due to their growing political importance. One can make a
comparison to the predecessors of the Religious Right: the silent majority.
Both of said groups hold similar ideals that are based on traditional values
(often these values relate to religious teachings or values, but it is not a
necessity for such link to be evident). It can be argued, that due to the
"chaotic" times under the last few presidents (Carter, Ford and Nixon),
people gradually grew disconent with the idea of the presidency and how
previous leaders would handle situations. The dominance of the Republican
party within the 1980s arguably came around for a few reasons: the poor
performance of the American economy under the Democrat president Jimmy
Carter and the poor management of foreign affairs (Iran Hostage Crisis,
Soviet invasion of Afghanistan). It can be argued that traditional values
resurfaced to the foreground of the political landscape for the same reason
as they did in the case of the silent majority: nostalgia. Historians may be
able to put forward evidence such as: the growth in numbers of
'televangelists' / television evangelists (these were a group of evangelists
who had a position in the media industry. At face value this may seem
simplistic, but media plays a significant part in shaping political discussions
or even viewpoints. People indulge in media in order to obtain information of
some form or another, it would be of no surprise that religion is able to be
promoted through this. It was found that the top 8 televangelists in the year
1980 made $310 million from their own respective programmes that reached
20 million people. The 20 million in the audience expectedly would feel
represented within the media, and understand their value in attempting to
, revive a more traditional way of living), Reagan's campaign was influenced
by this group (like Nixon, Reagan tapped into the current version of the silent
majority and expressed his support for traditional family values, traditional
gender roles and even the rights of unborn children- which is still seen as a
controversial topic to this day). Causes that were supported by the Moral
Majority / Religious Right had $100 million raised by Jerry Falwell, this figure
is said to be significantly higher than what was raised by the Democratic
party. Whilst not every American citizen would have been drawn towards a
right wing ideological standpoint, it can be seen that overall a cultural shift
was evident: even on the left wing this was evident, as traditional
Democratic middle class voters turned to Ronald Reagan within the 1980s,
this group were known as "Reagan Democrats". Although, the point could
equally be made that political rhetoric was being used in order to ensure that
Reagan was not just able to obtain voters during the election, but to secure
supporters for his policies. One study found that a stronger Christian Right
presence in a state was linked to greater public-wide political participation-
this could be for a number of reasons (such as people wishing to reinstate
traditional values, or those who wish to vote against such reformation). A
historian may be able to argue that when the evidence stated above is
analysed, the Religious Right was successful in its growth in the period 1978
- 1988, which of course will allow for its aims to be considered by politicians
and potentially carried out given the nature of the aim. From assessing the
information provided above, it can be said that whilst this was not
necessarily an aim, this facilitated the way for which aims set out by the
religious right could have been carried out.
On the other hand, it can be argued that the Religious Right was not fully
successful in its aims in the period 1978 - 1988 in regards to the rights of
unborn babies / on the matter of abortion. Abortion is a matter surrounded
by great controversy (even to this day, the topic has not become less
sensitive). A traditional standpoint on the matter would argue that a foetus
should be given the same care that a child would, as after conception a child
has been created; a modern / more liberal standpoint on the matter would
suggest that a child only recieves such status after birth has taken place
(although some have become more extreme on the matter and believe that
a born baby can be treated as if it were a foetus). It is to no surprise that the
religious right take the more traditional approach, as they view life as a
sacred concept that must be protected and respected. Whilst the term
abortion may not directly be stated within the bible, many have associated
certain passages with such topic: Whoever takes a human life shall surely be
put to death" Leviticus 24:17, Exodus 20:13 and finally Psalm 139:13-16 to
name just a few. Christians of all denominations agree across the board that
murder of any form is wrong, it is not surprising in the slightest that the idea
of a human being (or potential human being in the eyes of those with more
liberal views) being terminated is not an idea that this group of people stand
for. Historians may be able to put forward evidence such as: Southern
