Culture Wars The Struggle to Define America by James Davison Hunter (z-lib.org)

Notes

CHAPTER I: CULTURAL CONFLICT IN AMERICA

1.See J. Dolan, "Catholic Attitudes Toward Protestants," in Uncivil Religion, ed. R. N. Bellah and F. E. Greenspahn (New York: Crossroad, 1987), pp. 72-85, for a brief review of Catholic resentment toward Protestantism and the reasons why it was relatively muted.

2.See T. M. Keefe, "The Catholic Issue in the Chicago Tribune Before the Civil War," Mid-America 57 (October 1975): 227-45.

3.These figures come from R. A. Billington, "Tentative Bibliography of AntiCatholic :Propaganda," Catholic Historical.Review 18 (1932): 492-513. Among the newspapers and magazines were Tlw ProtesllJnt Vindicator, TM AntiRomanist, TM PTOtesllJnt Banner, Priestcro{t Unmasked, TM Native American, TM RefDTmation Defended Against tM ETTOTs of tM Times, TM American Protestant Magazine, Tlw. Spirit of tM XIX Century, and TM North American ProtesllJnt Magazine or, as it was also called, TM Anti-Jesuit. Among the books published were such evocative titles as Jesuit Juggling: Forty Popish Fmuds Detected and Disclosed (1834), TM Papal Conspiracj Exposed and Protestantism Defended in tM

Light ofReason, History and Scripture (1855), Popery Stripped ofIts Gari (1836), TM Papacy: tM Anti-Christ of Scripture (1854), and Book of Tmcts on Romani.rm: Conlaining tM Origin and Progress, Cn111lties, Fmuds, Superstitions, Mimcles and Ceremonies of tM Church of Rome (1844).

4.Through the 1840s and 1850s the Committee for the Inspection ofConvents was established and operated by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. See R. A. Billington, TM Protestant CT1.1Sade (Gloucester, Mass.: Peter Smith,

NOTES

327

1963); and T. Mayo~. The Story of American Catholicism (New York: Macmillan, 1942).

5Horatio Alger, Adrift in New York, and the World Before Him, ed. William Coyle (New York: Odyssey Press, 1966); Ben, the Luggage Boy, or Amongthe Wharoes

(Boston: Loring, 1870); Paul the Peddler, or The Adventures of a Young Street Merchant (Boston: Loring, 1871).

6.This literature is summarized in some depth in M. N. Dobkowski, "American Anti-Semitism," American Quarterly 29 (Summer 1977): 166-81. See also

Louis Harap, The Image of the Jew in American Literature: From Early Republic to Mass Immigration, 1st ed. (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society of America, 1974).

7.A number of important sources explore the nature of anti-Semitism at the end of the nineteenth and the beginning of the twentieth centuries. See, for example, 0. Handlin, "American Views of the Jews," American Jewish Historical Society 40 Uune 1951): 323-45; J. Higham, "Social DiScrimination · . Against Jews," American Jewish Historical Society 47 (September 1957):1-33;·

Higham, "Ami-Semitism in the Gilded Age," Mississippi Valley Histoncal Re- view 43 (March 1957): 559-78; and C. Stember, ed., Jews in the Mind of

America (New York: Basic Books, 1966).

8.R. Hofstadter and M. Wallace, eds., American Violence (New York: Vintage Books, 1971), p. 302.

9.An account of these experiences is given in G. Sessions, "Myth, Mormonism, and Murder in the South," South.Atlantic Quarterly 75 (Spring 1976): 212-

25.See also T. O'Dea, The Mormons (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1957); and D. B. Da~s. "Some Themes of Counter-Subversion," Mississippi Valley Historical Review 47 (1960): 205-25.

10.Interestingly, while neutrality increased and antipathy declined, close identification among various denominations (as measured by "feelings of warmth") did. not increase. These findings are a part of the University of Michigan surveys on American Presidential Politics. The "feeling thermometer" they employed was a 100 point scale along which respondents were asked to locate themselves according to coldness and warmth they felt for different groups. Coldness was measured as a score between 1 and 40, neutrality between 41 and 69, and warmth between 70 and 100. For the general population, coldness toward Catholics decreased from 13 percent of the population in 1966 to 9.9 percent in 1984. (Comparable figures were not available for Protestants and Catholics, but for blacks, the figure dropped from 15 percent to 11 percent.) Those neutral toward Catholics grew from 39 percent in 1966 to 46 percent in 1984; those neutral toward Protestants rose from 27 percent in 1966 to 47 percent in 1976; and for Jews, from 47 percent in 1966 to 56 percent in 1984. Protestants and Jews were omitted from the 1984 survey.

328

"NOTES

11.The earlier figures were taken from a 1958 Gallup Poll while the more current figures come from j. D. Hunter and 0. Guinness, eds., The Williamsburg Charter Survey on Religion and Public Life, a survey conducted in December 1987 (Washington, D.C.: Williamsburg Charter Foundation, 1988).

12.The single most comprehensive summary of the data on non-Jewish beliefs aboutJews from tQe 1930s to the mid-l 960s is Stember, "The Recent History of Public Attitudes," in his Jews in the Mind of America, pp. 310-36. For the data produced between the mid-l 960s and the early 1980s, see G. Rosenfield, "The Polls: Attitudes Toward American Jews," Public opinion Q)i,arterly 46 (1982): 431-43. Studies that should be reviewed in their own right and that collectively support this general thesis are C. Glock and R. Stark, Chris.tiiin Beliefs and Anti-Semitism (New York: Harper&: Row, 1966); G. Selznick and S. Steinberg, The Tenacity ofPrejudice (New York: Harper&: Row, 1969); H.

Quinley and C. Glock, Anti-Semitism in America (New York: Free Press, 1979); and G. Martire and R. Clark, Anti-Semitism in the United States (New York: Praeger, 1982).

13.See the "Nationwide Attitudes Survey-September 1986, a Confidential Report Presented to the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith," by Tarrance, Hill, Newport, and Ryan. The report received a great deal of media play as well. See Bruce Bursm?-, "Anti-Semitism Fading for Some," Chicago Tribune, 9 January 1987; and Marjorie Hyer, "Poll Finds No Rise in AntiSemitism: Most Evangelicals Reject Jewish Stereotypes," Washington Post, 10 January 1987, p. GB. .

14.See j. L. Sullivan, j. J>iereson and G. Marcus, Political Tolerance and American Democracy (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1982), for a summary of some of these data. The General Social Survey performed annually by the National Opinion Research Center has asked questions about the free speech rights of atheists, communists, and homosexuals since 1972 and even since thll;t time the overall trend has been toward greater toleration. In 1973, for example, 41 percent of the American population agreed that a communist should be allowed to teach in public schools. By 1987 this had increased to 49 percent. Likewise, in 1973, 49 percent of the general population agreed that a homosexual should be allowed to teach but by 1987, that percentage had increased to 58. (From the author's reanalysis of the General Social Survey.)

15.Kate DeSmet, "Shotgun Approach: Congress of Fundamentalists Labels Catholic Church 'Mother of Harlots,' " Detroit News, 20 August 1983. The anti-Catholic and anti-Semitic invectives of the pentecostal televangelist jimmy Swaggart have been especially pronounced. He has called Catholic$ "poor pitiful individuals that think they have enriched themselves by kissing the Pope's ring" (reported by the Associated Press, 9 March 1985) and has claimed that "a large segment of the Jewish community within the enter-

NO.TES

329

tainment industry ... is doing everything in its power to destroy the very element that has produced ... freedom" (reported in The Evangelist, July 1985; emphasis in the original).

16.The term "progressive" is somewhat imprecise but it is suggestive. The word is not totally satisfactory because of its association with the political movement and ideology. It also connotes a positive development which many would find debatable. Yet the search for alternate terms leads to other problems. The antonyms of orthodoxy-heterodoxy or heresy-connote too much. "Revisionism" is problematic, too,· as it implies a departure from truth. The problem is not truth versus falsehood but between different interpretations of truth-interpretations that differ because the criteria (or authority) established to measure correct interpretation differ.

·17. Secularists are represented in such organizations as the American Humanist Association (founded in 1941), the Council for Democratic and Secular Humanism (founded 1980), the National Service Conference of the American Ethical Union (founded 1929), Gay and Lesbian Atheists (founded 1978), Libertarians for Gay and Lesbian Concerns (founded 1981), and the Association of Libertarian Feminists (founded 1975).

18.Their agreement is confirmed in the Religion and Power Survey in James Davison Hunter, John Jarvis, and John Herrmann, "Cultural Elites and Political Values," unpublished paper, University of Virginia, 1988.

19.Robert Wuthnow's book, The Restructuring of American Religion (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1988) is the most exhaustive statement on the developments described in this book to date. Those familiar with Wuthnow's treatment should see my book not just as a validation of his general argument but as an extension of it as well. Where Wuthnow focuses upon

Protestantism, I focus on the interfaith dimensions of the problem. Where he vi~ws the tensions as those that exist between "religious· liberals" and

"religious conservatives," I view the tensions as both deeper and more significant.

20.See Mark Noll's essay, ."The Eclipse of Old Hostilities," in Uncivil Religion, ed. Bellah and Greenspahn, p. 99.

21."The Webster Decision," Nightline, ABC-TV broadcast, July 3, 1989.

22.There is little doubt that the controversy over abortion is a central part of the larger conflict. Indeed, it has crystallized the antagonism between the orthodox and progressive as no other issue has. Yet once again, the moral propriety and legality of abortion is just one of many issues over which this war is being fought. David Broder, "Trivial Pursuits," editorial, Washington Post, 17 June 1990, p. D7.

23.This comment was made by photographer Jock Sturgis, taken from a transcript of "48 Hours," CBS News, 27 June 1990.

24.Ibid.

25.From an anonymous video store owner interviewed on "48 Hours," ibid.

330

NOTES

CHAPTER 2: THE ANATOMY OF CULTURAL CONFLICT

1.John Dewey, in his book A Common Faith (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1934), argued for the universality of humanism and yet he pitched his plea as a new religious faith. The Humanist Manifesto I ($ 11 do much the same (particularly in the first manifesto where humanism is defined as the highest expression of religious faith). But the most convincing evidence of this is the sectarian tone of any issue of Free 1111JUiry and of The Humanist.

2.This is the way Richard Neuhaus put it in "Religion and Public Life: The Continuing Conversation," Christian Century 107, 21(ll-18July1990): 672.

3.The best summary of the legitimating role of religion in public life remains Peter Berger's The Sacred Canopy (New York: Doubleday, 1967), esp. chapter 2.

4.Empirical evidence would suggest that this is a fairly rarefied discourse as well. Most public opinion surveys show a tremendous gap between elite opinion and the opinion of the general population.

5.Most of Gramsci's writings on the subject of intellectuals and cultural hegemony come from Q. Hoare and G. N. Smith, eds., Selections from the Prison Notebooks of Antonio Gramsci (New York: International Publishers, 1971). A useful and coherent summary of this work is found in L. Salamini, The · Sociology of Political Praxis (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1981). See also J. Femia, "Hegemony and Consciousness in the Thought of Antonio Gramsci," Political Studies 12, 1 (1975): 29-48; and T. Bates, "Gramsci and the Theory of Hegemony,"]oumal ofthe History ofIdeas 36 (April-May 1975): 351-66).

6.GramsCi. was a Marxist revisionist primarily concerned with explaining why the socialist revolution did not occur as anticipated and the conditions under which the urban proletariat would achieve class consciousness. Gramsci became the first Marxist thinker to adopt a nonreductionist approach to the superstructure and to develop a general theory of intellectuals and intellectual work in advanced capitalism. For Gramsci, the concept of the intellectual could. not be defined by the behavior intrinsic to ideational activity. The reason is that there is a minimum of creative intellectual activity in all labor, however degraded it may be. "All .men are intellectuals," he proclaimed, referring to the fact that everyone has particular tastes, has a particular aesthetic preference, and has a particular view of the world. Nevertheless, "not all nien have in society the function of intellectuals." For Gramsci, then, intellectuals were functionaries of the superstructure. What is more, intellectuals in this sense do not themselves constitute a class but are simply "strata" produced within each social class. In other words, all social classes produce intellectuals who defend· the interests of their class and assert its hegemonic interests. In the past, intellectuals of the dominant classes

NOTES

331

have always been able to maintain their hegemony because the ideologies of the masses never had the capacity to become universai and integral conceptions of the world. Gramsci felt that Marxism was the most integral conception of the world aimed at raising the consciousness of the masses. Because it allowed for a new organic and dialectical relationship between intellectuals and the masses, he optimistically believed the grounds were laid for a new and effective challenge to the dominant powers. Gramsci's analysis of the role of intellectuals iii modern societies would have emerged as a lasting contribution were it not for his unshakeable commitment to the idea and reality of the proletarian revolution. Thus modified, Gramsci provides powerful analytical tools for the study of contemporary .cultural conflict.

7.For Gramsci this dynamic played itself out with interesting but not falsifying variation in the bourgeois revolutions in France, Italy, England, and Germany. See Salamini, Sociology of Political Praxis, pp. 109-13, for a summary of his review.

8.The most elaborate documentation of the ideals of American exceptionalism in the nineteenth century can be found in E. Tuveson, Redeemer Nation (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1968).

9.S. M. Lipset, "American Exceptionalism Reaffirmed," Tocqueville Review 10 (1990): 13 makes a similar point.

10.Ibid.

11.David Shenk, "Mobilizing the Campus Voice," CV: The College Magazine 1, 4 (1989): 50.

12.john F. Baker, "A War That Must Be Won," Publisher's Weekly, 1June 1990,

P· 8.

13.From an endorsement for the Alabama Family Alliance, by James Dobson, president of the national organization Focus on the Family.

14.Tl}is is particularly true among conservative activists because of their embattled position in the social structure. Quoted in Richard Viguerie, The New Right: We're Ready to Lea4 (Falls Church, Va.: Viguerie Company, 1980).

CHAPTER 3: THE HISTORICAL ROOTS OF THE CULTURE WAR

1.Perhaps the first history of religion in America was published by Ro~n Baird in 1844 (Religion in America [New York: Harper and Brothers]). In chapter 7 of book III, Baird himself makes this point: "Any doubts that the Constitution of the United States may suggest as to the Christian character of the National Government will be dissipated by a statement of facts." Here he lists dozens of ways in which the government reflects a Christian character despite its' being formally separated from any establishment.

2.Ttiese figures come from T. Maynard, The Story ofAmerican Catholicism (New

332

NOTES

York: Macmillan, 1942), p. 277; and G. Shaughnessy, Has the Immigrant Kept the Faith? (New York: Arno Press, 1969), chs. 8-10.

3.The estimates are a bit dodgy. In the American Jewish Yearbook, 1899-1900

(Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society of America, 1899) it was estimated that there were 6,000 Jews in 1826 and in 1840 there were 15,000. Comparable data for the later years mentioned can be found in the 1916 Census of Religious Bodies (Washington, D.C.:, Department of Commerce, 1916). Many of these figures are based on the number of family households.

4.Charles S. Liebman cites figures that put the Jewish immigration into the United States between 1881 and 1885 alone at 50,000. See his "Orthodoxy in American Jewish Life," in Dimensions of Orthodox Judaism, ed. R. P. Bulka (New York: KTAV Publishing, 1983), p. 39.

5.D. Ravitch, The Great School Wars (New York: Basic Books, 1973).

6.W. Herberg, Protestant, Catholic, few (New York: Harper and Row, 1955).

7.See T. Smith, "Immigrant Social Aspirations and American Education," American Quarterly 21(Fall1969): 523-43; T. Smith, ~'Religion and Ethnicity in America," American Historical Review 83 (December 1978): 1155-85; and

R. Miller and T. Marzik, eds., Immigrants and Religion in Urban America (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1977).

8.Schechter quoted in Smith, "Religion and Ethnicity in America," p. 118.

9.Many scholars have co!11mented on this metaphor. See, for example, E. L. Tuveson, Redeemer Nation (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1968). But the work of Timothy Smith is among the most careful and insightful on this point. See his "Religion and Ethnicity in America"; "Biblical Ideals in American Christian and Jewish Philanthropy" AmericanJewish History 74 (September 1984): 3-26; "New Approaches to the History of Immigration" American Historical Review 71 (July 1966): 1265-79; and "Immigrant Social Aspirations and American Education."

10.These figures are derived from G. Gallup, Religion in America (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton Religion Research Center, 1985).

11.Figures on the growth of Mormonism are derived from successive volumes of the Yearbook ofAmerican and Canadian Churches (Nashville: Abingdon Press, annual).

12.Numerous studies ·point to the patterns of upward mobility of Catholics. Andrew Greeley has gone even further by arguing that Catholics have become nearly comparable to Protestants in educational attainment and occupational prestige and have pulled ahead of Protestants in income. See A. M. Greeley, Ethnicity, Denomination, and Inequality (Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage, 1976).

13.These data came from Richard Ostling, "Americans Facing Toward Mecca," Time, 23 May 1988, pp. 49-50. For comparative figures see Terry Muck, "The Mosque Next Door," Christianity Today, 19 February 1988, pp. 15-17; and the Yearbook of American and Canadian Churches.

p. 155.

20. G. P. Fogarty, The Vatican and the mann, 1982), p. 144.

of American Religion

	NOTES	333
14.	Ibid.
15.	Gallup, Religion in America, p. 34.	,

16.'see R. Wuthnow, "Religious Movements a:nd Counter-Movements," in New Religious Movements and Rapid Social Change, ed. J. A. Beckford (Paris: UNESCO, 1987).

17.The best summary statistics for this phenomenon are found in Wuthnow, "Religious Movements." On the impact of the new religious consciousness in San Francisco, Wuthnow's "Bay Area" surveys are tremendously revealing. See R. Wuthnow, The Consciousness Reformation (Los Angeles and Ber:keley, University of California Press, 1976). On its impact in Boulder, see Fergus M. Bordewich, "Colorado's Thriving Cults," New York Times Magazine, l May 1988, pp. 37-43.

18.These figures are taken from Gallup, Religion in America. The most recent data are from J. D. Hunter, The Williamsburg Charter Survey on Religion and American Public Life (Washington, D.C.: Williamsburg Charter Foundation, 1988).

19.Robert Wuthnow's accumulation of evidence on the expansion of higher education is very convincing on this point. He shows, for example, ~t the proportion of college-age individuals attending and completing university

training grew from 22.3 percent in 1960 to 35.2 percent in 1970. What is more, expenditures on higher education expanded from $2.2 billion in 1950 to $5.6 billion in 1960 to $23.4 billion in 1970. R. Wuthnow, The Restructuring (Princeton, N.j.: Princeton University Press, 1988),

'

American Hierarchy (Stuttgart: Anton Hierse-

·

21.This passage was quoted from J. A. Hardon, American Judaism (Chicago: Loyola University Press, 1971), p. 104.

22.I rely heavily upon the account given by Fogarty, The Vatican and the American Hierarchy, pp. 177-94. See also M. M. Reher, "Leo XIII and 'Americanism,'"

Theological Studies 34 (1973): 679-89.

23.See G. P. Fogarty, "Dissent at Catholic University: The Case of Henry Poets," America (11 October 1986): 180-84.

24.See N. Glazer, AmericanJudaism (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1957), p. 38.

25.A good brief summary of the Consetvative movement can be found in B. Martin, "Conservative Judaism and Reconstructionism," in Movements and lssuesinAmericanJudaism, ed. B. Martin (Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1978), pp. 103-57. A more expanded history can be found in M: Sklare,

Conservative Judaism: An American Religious Movement (New York: Schocken, 1972).

26.Later orthodox Catholic grot!-ps included the Catholic Traditionalist Movement (1964), Catholics United for the Faith (1968), Charismatic Renewal

334 NOTES

Services (1971), and the Catholic League for Civil and Religious Rights (1973), and on the progressivist side were the higher echelons of the Catholic leadership (including the American Catholic Bishops) as well as Dignity, Catholics for ERA, and so on. ·

27.G. Lenski, The Religious Factor (Garden City: Anchor Doubleday, 1961).

28.R. Stark and C. Glock, American Piety: The Nature ofReligious Commitment (Los Angeles and Berkeley: University of California Press, 1968).

29.The most comprehensive review of this evidence can be found in Wuthnow,

The Restructuring ofAmerican Religion, chapter 5, "The Declining Significance of Denominationalism." What I review here are only samples from this literature.

30.Ibid., p. 92.

31.Indeed, negative feelings toward Episcopalians, Lutherans, Methodists, Presbyterians, and Baptists were almost nonexistent and negative opinions of the more sectarian denominations such as the Mormons and the Pentecostals were only slightly more visible (up to one-fifth of the population held such views). See ibid., pp. 91-92.

32.A Gallup Poll in 1955 showed, for example, that only one of every twentyfive adults (or 4 percent) no longer adhered to the faith of their childhood.

Almost thirty years later, one of every three adults belonged to a faith other than the one in which they had been reared. Among Presbyterians, Meth-

. odists, ·and Episcopalians the ratios were even higher. Interestingly, these patterns even hold for Jews and Catholics: roughly one out of six had switched to another faith. These Gallup figures are reported in ibid., p. 88.

33.Ibid.

34.From the author's reanalysis of the 1987 General Social Survey. The question about abortion was the most sweeping, asking for approval or disapproval of abortion "under any circumstances." The Baptists were, as expected, significantly more conservative politically than the Unitarians, Episcopalians, and the United Church of Christ. But again, I would argue that this is a function of the theological and political demography of the membership of these denominations.

35.These figures are taken from Wuthnow, The Restructuring of American Reli- gion, p. 84.

36.The dates given for the YMCA and the Salvation Army are the years that these organizations were established in the United States.

37.A more comprehensive list can be found in the CatholieAlmanac (Huntington, Ind.: Our Sunday Visitor, Inc., 1987), pp. 564-71.

38.A more comprehensive list can be found in the American Jewish Yearbook

(Philadelphia: American Jewish Committee, 1986), ,366 ff.

·39. On how these organizations have become increas .y powerful, see A. Hertzke, Representing God in Washington: The Role of Religious Lobbies in the

American Polity, Ph.D. diss., University of Wisconsin, 1986.

NOTES

335

40.All of these figures are taken from Wuthnow, The Restructuring of American Religion, pp. 112-13.

41.Umbrella organizations are somewhat limited in number but are·fairly well known. Among them are the National Council of Churches (1950) reconstituted from the earlier Federal Council of Churches (1908), the Consultation on Church Union (1962), the Interchurch Center (1948), the National Association of Evangelicals (1942), the American Council of Chris- tian Churches (1941), the Independent Fundamentalist Churches of America (1930), the Independent Fundamentalist Bible Churches (1965), the National Association of Holiness Churches (1971). These also include the agencies working across religious faiths, such as the National Ecllmenical Coalition (1976), the National Conference of Christians and Jews (1928), the International Jewish Committee on Interreligious Consultations, and the American Forum for Jewish-Christian Cooperation (1980). Years in parentheses indicate year of foundation, here and throughout the text and notes.

42.This category would include hundreds of professional associations as diverse

as the Fellowship of Christian Firefighters, the Association of Orthodox Jewish Scientists, the Christian Association of Psychological Studies, the Catholic Association of Foresters, the National Association of Orthodox Jewish Teachers, the National Catholic Bandmasters' Association, the Christian Pharmacists' Fellowship, the Jewish Lawyers' Guild, Cowboys for Christ, and the like. It would also include "protectionist" societies, societies oriented toward safeguarding particular religious and moral beliefs. Among these would be the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights (1973), the Anti-Defamation League ofB'nai B'rith (1913),Jews for Jews (1970), Project Yedid (1980), the Spiritual Counterfeits Project (1975), the Cult Awareness Network (1974) and the Voice ofLibertyAssociation (1961). Beyond these it would include an enormous religious media industry: nearly 1,400 radio stations, more than 220 television stations, more than 500 religious newspapers and periodicals, and more than 2,000 religious titles per year. Finally it would include educational organizations: more than 500 Orthodox Jewish day schools, more than 16,000 Evangelical Christian elementary,junior and senior high schools, and just under 10,000 Catholic parochial schools, more than 100 Evangelical, 238 Catholic, and 30 Jewish colleges and universities.

43.Here again it is nearly impossible to catalogue the variety. To illustrate, by 1988 there were about 25 religiously oriented organizations dealing with the issue ofabortion, at least 17 dealing with the relationship between church and state, about 6 focusing on pornography, well over 50 concerned with women's or men's rights, roughly 22 treating the issues surrounding homosexuality, about IO focusing on the role of the media, approximately 36 dealing with the issues of war and peace, and more than 100 concerned with the promotion of general value systems. An analysis of these organi-