Secular Vs Religion- who calls the shots

In class we discussed whether religion shapes, conforms to or has a symbiotic relationship with societal change. We all seemed to take one position and argue that, if one were true, the others must be false. This to me is a misguided assumption. Religion is not one single thing, but a title given to a wide variety of beliefs, rules and assumptions. Some aspects of religion are fluid and changeable over time, while others are more foundational and solid. Religion and secular culture exist, not only with parts of the other. In these clashes between the two "teams", you could consider each to be divided into thousand of little "battalions", each one comprised of one ritual or belief or norm. If a strong, solid religious belief comes into conflict with a fluid, unsteady secular one (such as the evil religious symbolism of devils horns clashing with an up and coming trend of wearing them to dinner parties) then the religious battalion will win. However, when strong secular beliefs class with shaky religious references, then secular culture will win (the 1920's desire for female liberation overriding the biblical requirements of modesty in dress and behavior). Yes, occasionally religion causes enormous, spectacular changes in secular culture and thus completely reshapes a new society (the founding of America) but then secular drives and beliefs do that too (Lutheranism). It is impossible to overriding say that "religion shapes secular culture" or "religion conforms to secular changes", because they are constantly changing each other.