6/CHRONICLESnSchool busing is back in the news. Butnthis time around the problem is withnthe drivers. At issue is the “right” ofnfemale bus drivers to drive the childrennof Hasidic Jews to school in Monroe,nNew York. When Hasidic leaders objectednto women drivers as a violationnof their religious beliefs, the ladiesnfiled a grievance and won an arbitrationnruling in 1984 in their favor. Butnround two went to the Hasidim, whonsecured a temporary restraining ordernfrom the state courts. In round three,nthe women drivers filed a civil rightsnaction in Federal court, on which andecision is still pending. In the meantime,nthe temporary restraining ordernhas lapsed. Even though the schoolndistrict has offered to make up the payndifference for the three women involvednif they will accept shorter non-nHasidic routes, the women drivers andntheir union prefer to watch the 600nCULTURAL REVOLUTIONSnHasidic students walk up to three milesnto school. That’s showing ’em.nIt is hard to tell where the Federalncourts will come down on this one.nThe Supreme Court has already determinednin the widely publicized BobnJones University case that racial equalitynconstitutes an “overriding interest”nthat permits the government to restrictnthe religious freedom of schools thatndo not comply with Federal antidiscriminationnregulations. Perhaps thenFederal courts will use the Monroencase to broaden this line of thought bynmaking it applicable to equality betweennthe sexes. If so, we might eventuallynsee the government withdrawntax-exempt status from churches thatnpreserve the biblical institution of fathernleadership in the home and barnfemale ordinations in the church. Itnwill be a big, not to say strange,npolitical bed that holds Fundamental-nIn the forthcoming issue of Chronicles:nManufacturing Opinionsn”What leaders want in their parties is a dogmatic relativism,na sense of superior wisdom that by abandoningn(verbally) all claim to truth is spared the rigors of selfexamination.”nALSOn—from “Having Opinions”nby Stephen R.L. ClarknThomas Molnar on universitiesnIrving Horowitz on academic publishingnHenry Regnery on the Book-of-the-Month ClubnClyde Wilson on Harvard historiographynnnists, many Lutherans, Mormons, andnHasidic Jews together in alliance.nFor the Hasidim, however, there is anray of hope. In contemporary America,nclaims to religious freedom arenmore likely to receive a sympatheticnhearing when they come from OrthodoxnJews than when they come fromnFundamentalist Christians, After all,nno one fears being called “anti-nFundamentalist,” but few epithetsnsting like that of “anti-Semite.” Thenpoliticians sitting on the Federal benchnwill just have to choose whatever is thenlesser of two evils: anti-Semitism ornsexism. It’s a Hobson’s choice we’dnwish only on a Federal judge.nChinese students recently surprisednthe authorities when they began stagingndemonstrations in Kunming andnShanghai for broader democracy. Anmedical student listed his aims for anTime reporter: “Freedom of expression,nfreedom of the press, publication,nand association.” Another demonstratornput the matter more simply:n”We simply want to have the freedomnto do what we want.”nChinese leaders should not havenbeen so shocked by this development.nAfter all, it was they who introducednnew profit-motive reforms into Chineseneconomy in 1984. Of course,nthese highly successful economic reformsnwere not supposed to disturb thenbasic political order. But as Britishnhistorian Paul Johnson argues in OnnFreedom, it is folly to suppose “thatnone can distinguish between politicalnand economic freedom.” “Once freedomnof trade is acquired by largennumbers of individuals . . . free politicalninstitutions also emerge quitenrapidly . . . the expansion of economicnfreedom . . . was also the progenitornof parliamentary democracy andn