Therefore, the definition of morality policy lies not in any intrinsic, objec-
tive characteristic of a policy or the substantive topic. A policy dealing with
sexual behavior need not necessarily be morality policy, just as a policy dealing
with economic regulation might well be a morality policy. A policy is classified
as a morality policy based on the perceptions of the actors involved and the
terms of the debate among them. Perceptions of issues drive political behavior,
and since it is the unique political behavior surrounding morality policy that
scholars in this area are trying to explain, it is these perceptions that we should
be concerned with when defining this policy category. If at least one advocacy
coalition involved in the debate defines the issue as threatening one of its core
values, its first principles, we have a morality policy. More important, in these
cases, we have a policy debate and a process that will have the characteristics of
morality politics.

The core values that stimulate morality policy debate are rooted deeply in
a person's belief system, determining how he or she defines himself or herself and
his or her place in society ( Tatalovich, Smith, and Bobic 1994). These are the
values of primary identity: race, gender, sexuality, and especially religion, which
is for many people the basis of their most fundamental values ( Tatalovich and
Daynes 1998; Button, Rienzo, and Wald 1997, 5-6). Unlike more secondary
identities, such as class and socioeconomic status, most people never even hope
to change these primary identities, even in the socially mobile, optimistic U.S.
culture.

In a homogeneous society, in which most people share basic values, rarely
are these first principles the subject of political controversy. Only when values
are threatened do they need to be codified ( Studlar, Chapter 3, this volume).
And when threats to basic values do occur, they cut so deeply into the core of a
society that their codification appears imperative, literally to "save the world" as
it has been known. These values define not only who each individual is and his
or her place in society but also society itself. If these values change, then society
changes. Nothing is certain anymore. It is as if Newton's third law of motion was
suddenly repealed.

While much law codifies right and wrong, morality policy is different in that
it reflects values on which there exists no overwhelming consensus in a polity.
At least a significant minority of citizens has a fundamental, first-principled con-
flict with the values embodied in any morality policy. ¹ For instance, while almost
all people agree that murder and burglary ought to be illegal, there is no such
consensus on right-to-die or gambling policy. The degree to which there is public
consensus on the values embodied in a morality policy varies among policies
and over time and indeed can affect the politics of morality policy ( Meier, Chap-
ter 2, this volume; Mooney and Lee, Chapter 11, this volume; 2000). For exam-

-4-