THE term "culture wars" in America is commonly used to refer to the conflict between right-wing Christians and liberal secularists.
Many key battlegrounds involve issues where traditional religious ideas clash with modern notions of sexuality, such as abortion, homosexuality and contraception.
The culture wars have been simmering since the 1960s, but the phrase was popularised by the sociologist James Davison Hunter in 1991.
A year later, a speech by firebrand politician Patrick Buchanan to the Republican National Convention, in which he described a religious war for the soul of America, famously became known as the "culture war speech".
In it, he identified issues such as gay rights, pornography, abortion and discrimination against religious schools as "not the kind of change we can abide in a nation that we still call God's country".
Buchanan said: "This election is about much more than who gets what. It is about who we are. It is about what we believe.
"It is about what we stand for as Americans.
"There is a religious war going on in this country.
"It is a cultural war, as critical to the kind of nation we shall be as was the Cold War itself, for this war is for the soul of America."
The worst manifestations of the culture wars have seen violence directed towards abortion providers, with at least eight doctors, receptionists and security guards killed in such attacks in America over the past two decades.
A drive to incorporate gay marriage bans into state constitution in the early 2000s has been cited as the peak of the movement.
Other social issues, such as the ongoing debate over gun control, are also said to be deeply bound in the cultural fight between conservative and liberal values.
Last month, the US Supreme Court decided to allow multiple lower-court rulings against same-sex marriage bans to stand.
Among areas for potential clashes in the future could be new reproductive technology such as artificial wombs.
The issue of abortion is also still on the agenda, with some states, however, continuing to push for a ban on the procedure being carried out after 20 weeks.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article