1. Yes, but it is not as strong as it was 10 years ago. The death of Jerry Falwell and the increasingly obvious senility of Pat Robertson have dealt blows to the movement. Also, there are evangelical preachers like Rick Warren, who are distancing themselves from the politcal agenda of the religious right.
2. Some of it is a fair portrayal and some is not. There are conservatives who support the legalization of marijuana and are opposed to the curbing of civil liberties in the name of the War on Drug Users. I don't think too many people on the religious right support abortion rights, and most call for making it illegal, either for all women, or for all women with exceptions for rape, incest or the life of the mother. Protestant conservatives are not opposed to birth control for the most part, they are opposed to letting teenagers get access to medical methods like the Pill without parental consent. They are generally opposed to schools giving away condoms, but are not calling for stores to ask customers for id before selling them condoms.
Churches frequently have good reasons for calling for strict enforcement of prostitution laws-this has nothing to do with politics, though. When I lived in Detroit, there were several churches right on Woodward in Highland Park, where there are also a number of adult bookstores and peep shows. These establishments attract prostitutes. The churches put pressure on the city government to enforce the law, and helped organize the neighborhood people into action to stop this from happening, because there are not just churches, but elementary schools and day care programs in visual range.
I haven't heard too many calls to ban all PDA between gay people from the right. I have heard and read comments expressing disgust about gays kissing or holding hands in public. As long as that's the definition of PDA-nobody wants to see gay or straight people engaging in blatantly sexual acts out in public.
They're split over the evolution/creationism debate. You can see that here, on this board.
3. I think that the RR has taken over the GOP to the extent that they can. Reagan formed a coalition between fiscal and religious conservatives that has endured for a while, and still endures in parts of the country. They have the numbers to form a majority block in that party, but not in the nation at large. Has it hurt the GOP? I don't know, the jury's still out. It helped them win some elections, in particular, for Reagan and W. The RR connection probably helps the GOP win local elections and some congressional races.
On the other hand, I probably would vote for more GOP candidates if the religious right wasn't so influential in the Michigan GOP. The coming 2010 governor's race is a good example. I'd be willing to vote for a moderate republican like David Gorcyca, especially as the dems best potential candidate has said no (Dennis Archer, former Detroit Mayor). But I'm not voting for Hoekstra, even if the dems nominate Fieger. In that scenario, I would be tempted to vote 3rd party. I doubt that the GOP is that interested in my vote, however, and they have no reason to change their opposition to legal abortion and gay marriage to get a few votes at the risk of losing thousands.
4. There are always people who want to impose one set of values over everybody else, on all sides of the spectrum. When it comes to homosexuality, some people use their religious beliefs not just to claim its immoral behavior, but also to dehumanize those who practice it. A nut-job like that wouldn't care if the civil rights of gays were infringed on to prevent him from having to recognize their humanity, because he would rather define gays by the sex acts they allegedly commit.
There are people on the left that do the same thing. I would say that the pro gay marriage protestors who were harrassing people on their way to church would qualify in that regard, because they are taking what is basically a legal battle and making it personal. It's the "Approve me or me and my friends will get in your face" mentality. It's not going to win more support for legalizing gay marriage. Perez Hilton's treatment of the Miss USA candidate would also be an example of someone wanting to force another to accept his values.
I don't think the desire to make everyone follow a set of beliefs and rules is exclusive to the religious right.
Abortion is different, because the religious right believes that the procedure is murder. They don't see that as an issue of sexual morality, so they do not feel that they are trying to get the government to impose their morality on the populace by trying to get abortion re-criminalized. They see a voiceless victim who needs defending, and liken their fight to abolitionism in the 1800s. I may disagree with their arguments, but I don't think that they view it as taking away someone's rights, the way feminists and liberals like me do, but they see it as protecting the rights of the unborn.
As far as some of the fears about hate crimes, I'm a liberal, but I understand why they are afraid. There are situations in Canada where pastors have been charged with hate crimes for saying that homosexuality is wrong. Speech should never be considered a hate crime in a legal sense, with sanctions on those who violate the rules. Any law used to punish a pastor who states that homosexuality is wrong could be turned on liberals by conservatives, when they eventually get another president elected. I wouldn't want a conservative government telling me that criticizing fundamentalist christians was a hate crime.