The major objective of this article is to examine the process of the politicization of the family and to provide a sociological interpretation. Major social changes have led to the definition of the family as a social problem. Because old patterns have been disrupted, a “normative reaction to normlessness” has set in providing the motivation for the profamily social movement on both the religious and the political level. New Right familism can be viewed as a reaction to what are actually worldwide changes in family patterns that force a reevaluation of the “old individualism” (centered on male prerogatives) and encourage the acceptance of the “new individualism,” which respects the developing extrafamilial prerogatives of females, the young, and the elderly.
Various developments may provide further success or failure for the profamily movement, but the ultimate impact of the movement on society will depend upon the interaction of social organizational and normative dynamics. To the extent that liberal views on family matters prevail, advocates must respond to the need to develop a greater vision for America as a society along with their increased options for personal expression.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Aldous, J. 1981 “Contemporary relationships between churches and families: some problematic elements.” Presented before the University of Notre Dame Center for the study of American Catholicism Seminar on Families and Religion.
2.
Austin, C.1981“Religious Left and Right split on role in society.”New York Times (September 27): 14.
3.
Becker, H. 1957 “Current sacred-secular theory and its development,” pp. 133-185 in H. P. Becker and A. Boskoff (eds.) Modern Sociological Theory in Continuity and Change. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
4.
Becker, H.1960“Normative reactions to normlessness.”Amer. Soc. Rev.25 (December): 803-810.
5.
Bell, D. 1976 The Coming of Post-Industrial Society. New York: Basic Books.
6.
Bernard, J.1981“Facing the future.”Society18 (January/February): 53-59.
7.
Blake, J. 1977 “The abortion decisions: judicial review and public opinion,” pp. 51-82 in E. Manier, W. Liu, and D. Solomon (eds.) Abortion: New Directions for Policy Studies. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.
8.
Boles, J. K. 1979 The Politics of the Equal Rights Amendment. New York: Longman.
9.
Carmines, E. G. and J. A. Stimson1980“Two faces of issue voting.”Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev.74 (March): 78-91.
10.
Cherlin, A. and P. B. Walters1981“Trends in United States men's and women's sex-role attitudes: 1972 to 1978.”Amer. Soc. Rev.46 (August): 453-460.
11.
Crawford, A. 1980 Thunder on the Right. New York: Pantheon.
12.
Dellapenna, J. W.1979“The history of abortion: technology, morality, and law.”University of Pittsburgh Law Rev.40(3): 359-428.
13.
Durkheim, E. 1957 Professional Ethics and Civic Morals (C. Brookfield, trans.) London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
14.
Durkheim, E. 1965 The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life (1915, J. W. Swain, trans.). New York: Free Press.
15.
East Ohio Evangelical Fellowship of the United Methodist Church 1981 “Crisis of conscience: a controversy within the United Methodist Church, A White Paper.”Akron: East Ohio Evangelical Fellowship.
16.
Ebaugh, H.R.F. and C. A. Haney1980“Shifts in abortion attitudes: 1972-1978.”J. of Marriage and the Family42 (August): 491-499.
17.
Family Planning Perspectives1980“Catholics agree with Protestants that abortion and contraception should be widely available.”12 (January/February): 53.
18.
Fireman, B. and W. A. Gamson 1979 “Utilitarian logic in the resource mobilization perspective,” pp. 8-44 in M. N. Zald and J. D. McCarthy (eds.) The Dynamics of Social Movements. Cambridge, MA: Winthrop.
19.
Friedan, B. 1981 The Second Stage. New York: Summit.
20.
Gallup, G.1977“Religion in America.”Gallup Opinion Index, 145 (August): 1-120.
21.
Goldstein, L. F. 1979 “Sex and the Burger Court: recent judicial policy making toward women,” pp. 103-113 in M. L. Palley and M. B. Preston (eds.) Race, Sex, and Policy Problems. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath.
22.
Granberg, D.1978“Pro-life or reflection of conservative ideology?”Sociology and Social Research62, 3: 414-429.
23.
Gusfield, J. 1963 Symbolic Crusade: Status Politics and the American Temperance Movement. Urbana: Univ. of Illinois Press.
24.
Hacker, A.1979“Of two minds about abortion.”Harper's259 (September): 16-22.
25.
Hadden, J. K. and C. E. Swann 1981 Prime Time Preachers: The Rising Power of Televangelism. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
26.
Hastings Center Report1978“Is abortion a religious issue?”8, 4: 12-17.
27.
Hoge, D. R. and D. A. Roozen (eds.) 1979 Understanding Church Growth and Decline, 1950-1978. New York: Pilgrim Press.
28.
Huber, J. , C. Rexroat, and G. Spitze1978“A crucible of opinion on women's status: ERA in Illinois.”Social Forces57 (December): 549-565.
29.
Interchange1979“The politics of the right-to-life movement.”1-9.
30.
Isaacson, W.1981“The battle over abortion.”Time117 (April 6): 20-28.
31.
Jorstad, E. 1981 The Politics of Moralism: The New Christian Right in American Life. Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg.
32.
Julian, J. 1980 Social Problems. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
33.
Ladd, C. E.1980“How to tame the special-interest groups.”Fortune (October 20): 66-74.
34.
Laner, M. R. and S. L. Housker1980“Sexual permissiveness in younger and older adults.”J. of Family Issues1 (March): 103-124.
35.
Levy, M. J. 1965 “Aspects of the analysis of family structure,” pp. 1-64 in A. J. Coaleet al. (eds.) Aspects of the Analysis of Family Structure. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press.
36.
Lofland, J. 1981 “Sociologists as an interest group: Prospect and propriety.” Presented to the Pacific Sociological Association, Portland, OR
37.
Lowi, T. J. 1971 The Politics of Disorder. New York: Basic Books.
38.
Margolis, M. and K. Neary1980“Pressure politics revisited: the anti-abortion campaign.”Policy Studies J.8, 5: 698-716.
39.
Mauss, A. L. 1975 Social Problems as Social Movements. New York: J. B. Lippincott.
40.
Mayer, A. J.1980“A tide of born-again politics.”Newsweek (September 15): 28-36.
41.
McCarthy, J. D. and M. N. Zald1977“Resource mobilization and social movements: a partial theory.”Amer. J. of Sociology82 (May): 1212-1241.
42.
McCloskey, H.1964“Consensus and ideology in American politics.”Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev.58 (June): 361-382.
43.
Myers, L.1980“The Christian right: new wave in politics.”Washington Star, June 30-July 3.
44.
Neitz, M. J.1981“Family, state and God: ideologies of the right-to-life movement.”Soc. Analysis42 (Fall): 265-276.
45.
Palley, H. A.1978“Abortion policy: ideology, political cleavage and the policy process.”Policy Studies J.7, 2: 224-233.
46.
Reiss, I. L.1981“Some observations on ideology and sexuality in America.”J. of Marriage and the Family43 (May): 271-283.
47.
Republican National Convention Platform 1980 Proceedings and Debates of the Ninety-Sixth Congress, Second Session, Congressional Record, July 31.
48.
Riga, P. J.1979-1980“The Supreme Court's view of marriage and the family: tradition or transition?”J. of Family Law18: 301-330.
49.
Shriver, P. L. 1981 The Bible Vote: Religion and the New Right. New York: Pilgrim Press.
50.
Skerry, P.1978“The conflict over abortion.”Public Interest52 (Summer): 69-84.
51.
Steiner, G. 1981 The Futility of Family Policy. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
52.
Thomas, W. I. and F. Znaniecki 1958 The Polish Peasant in Europe and America. New York: Dover.
53.
Vinovskis, M. A.1979“The politics of abortion in the House of Representatives in 1976.”Michigan Law Rev.77, 7: 1790-1827.
54.
Weber, M. 1943 Max Weber and German Politics (J. P. Mayer, trans. and ed.). London: Faber & Faber.
55.
Weinberg, M. S. and E. Rubington 1973 The Solution of Social Problems: Five Perspectives. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.
56.
White, D.1980“The wider context of abortion.”New Society51 (February): 280-281.
57.
White House Conference on Families 1980 Listening to America's Families: Action for the 80's. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.
58.
Zald, M. N. and J. D. McCarthy (eds.) 1979 The Dynamics of Social Movements. Cambridge, MA: Winthrop.
