This is a fascinating article -- the only problem is that the author's rhetorical structure falls prey to that which it seems he's elucidating. In fact, "most people," by both then and now's standards hovers around the 50 percent mark -- meaning that the only conclusion is that most people don't like various forms of authoritarianism perpetrated upon them -- not that most people have embraced religious fundamentalism.
Of course some people will be attracted to both kinds of fundamentalism. I find them both harmful, when combined with an all-powerful federal government.
The author of the text would do well to remember that it is really big government and authoritarianism that chains people, and not the choice to pursue whatever belief system that one supports.
Does mandating abortion via the courts make the gov't bigger or smaller?
However, if one's belief system is predicated on intolerant self-righteous moral certitude, they will find a way to establish authoritarian big government so as to crush all opposition.
I.e., what people believe is important, too.
By mandating I really mean legalizing. It MUST be legal and the government branch known as the judicial branch will see that it remains legal. Is that bigger or smaller government? The woman is free from being told by the government not to kill the baby, but everyone else has been denied by the government the right to define their common values, including the right to life of every human being. And last, the child's life is not treated as equal by the government and there is nothing at all "we the people" can do about it. Is that bigger or smaller government?