My interpretation of the phrase might be wrong. I've always taken "neo-conservative" to mean the new breed of republican- very conservative regarding economics, but very liberal when it comes to government regulation of morals; they're often mentioned by the media in the same breath with religion-based movements.
I just looked it up:
"But it is only to a degree that neocons are comfortable in modern America. The steady decline in our democratic culture, sinking to new levels of vulgarity, does unite neocons with traditional conservatives--though not with those libertarian conservatives who are conservative in economics but unmindful of the culture. The upshot is a quite unexpected alliance between neocons, who include a fair proportion of secular intellectuals, and religious traditionalists. They are united on issues concerning the quality of education, the relations of church and state, the regulation of pornography, and the like, all of which they regard as proper candidates for the government's attention."- Irving Kristol
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Conten...tzmlw.asp?pg=1
It
sounds mostly reasonable; but I can see how the neo-cons get easily lumped together with "religious traditionalists", depending on the issue at hand. I
don't like the fact that they're essentially giving the r.t.'s more leverage; and while I don't agree with them politically, it's supposedly secular. What I don't understand is how a mostly secular movement can be united with the religious right concerning the relations of church and state. Huh?
I
can say this, though. Stay away from my porn, Irving.