Steven P. BarrettJIM DOBSON--DOES AMERICA WANT HIM AS ITS SPIRITUAL BOSS?
June 25th 2008 01:53
THE HARD CORES IN THE BIBLE BELT WILL HATE WHAT I'M GOING TO LAY OUT IN THIS BLOG, BUT THAT'S SIMPLY TOO BAD. I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS, QUITE SIMILAR TO THE LATE TIM RUSSERT'S ZINGER ("ARE YOU RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT?") TO ALL AMBITIOUS ASPIRANTS TO HIGHER OFFICE WHO CAME ON HIS SHOW.
HERE IT GOES: JIM DOBSON --
DO YOU WANT TO BE AMERICA'S SPIRITUAL BOSS?
or --
WHAT MAKES YOU QUALIFIED TO BE AMERICA'S SPIRITUAL BOSS?
or --
MANY CHRISTIANS WHO DISAGREE WITH YOU ON DIFFERING THEOLOGICAL POINTS MIGHT TAKE EXCEPTION TO YOUR CHARACTERIZATION OF SENATOR OBAMA'S VIEW OF CHRISTIANITY AND SCRIPTURE: ARE THEY FRUITCAKES?
Make no mistake, Dobson's attack on Obama today was no sudden outburst of frustration from a prominent evangelical activist who's been frustrated in getting a satisfactory answer from Senator Obama. Far from it. It was an ideologically planned and carefully calculated swipe at Obama.
If you'll excuse me, it was a theologically-inspired political "bitch slap" if I ever saw one.
Although I'd like to vote for Obama based on many of his other ideas, I am conscience-bound to withhold my vote for the Illinois legislator due to his stands on abortion and embryonic stem-cell research. In this respect, I share the same moral opinion as Dobson's.
But if you were to take those two issues off the table, I most likely would vote for Obama and not McCain, who's never been a giant when it came to honoring the wall of separation of expedience from religion in politics. In fact both candidates are far from sinless in this respect. But McCain never has struck me as a guy who'd allow any form of higher principles--even if wrongly construed--to impede his political ambitions.
Take a look at what Focus On The Family, which Dobson founded and controls, provided for the Associated Press:
What Dobson did here isn't new, unethical or shady. He's only doing what all talk show hosts have done for years. The problem is that he basically "proof text'd" Obama and used remarks made two years ago to set the candidate up for a blistering attack as opposed to holding a reasonable point-counterpoint broadcast and letting the listeners decide for themselves.
LIke I said above, it was a "bitch slap."
Obama was half-right when he responded to Dobson's rant by saying "Folks haven't been reading their Bibles." Senator, alot of Dobson's biggest evangelical followers and donors to Focus On The Family read their Bibles every day. The problem lies in not only what they don't read, but how they interpret what they do read.
By and large, these folks are literalists when it comes to Biblical interpretation. To borrow an old saying "The Bible says it, I believe it, that settles it." What Obama was only trying to say was you can't simply take the (Christian) Bible that was originally written by Jews then the Catholics (who also compiled it in the Fourth century a.d.) -- and apply it word for word in today's society and do justice to both the Bible and the faithful, be they Catholic or Protestant.
Does Jim Dobson like lobsters and crabs? Kills those goodbye. If he doesn't want Obama in the White House, he'd better remember that old saying, "So goes Maine." Maine's lobster business employs a lot of potential voters. Does he support a strong national defense, including the use, God forbid, of nuclear weapons, one day if necessary? A lot of voters work in defense, both in uniform and keeping the "arsenal of democracy" fully stocked.
Obama only used the "Sermon On The Mount" not to ridicule what Jesus said as irrelevant, but to demonstrate that there are times when a president, in the fufilfillment of carrying out the constitutional duties of the office he swore to fulfill--on a Bible--no less, any Christian president would invariably have to cross the grain of the very words as written in the Bible itself. And there are lots of instances where killing are expressedly forbidden.
Obama's reference to the nitpicky parts of the Bible and the more problematical teachings were carefully made to illustrate just how difficult it is to govern and lead a legally secular nation in times when there are so many issues affecting us in so many ways. You are not going to please everyone. That's the last thing I want to see in a president. On the other hand, you have to realize that not everybody is a White Evangelical Protestant Christian, nor was this nation also founded as an expressedly Christian nation.
Obama's views aren't mine, but I'd have never given any thoughts to calling them the "lowest common denominator of morality" or his views on abortion "a fruitcake interpretation of the Constitution."
In fact, calling Roe decision "a fruitcake interpretation" only depreciated the seriousness of its ramifications. Strict constitutionalists love harping on the "good old days" when judges would just look at the law and say, well, that's that...the plaintiff/defendant wins/loses ... and let's call it a day is a fantasy world look at law as well. However dearly I'd love to have seen the Constitution just as loosely intrepeted to dismiss Roe, how on earth could I also defend strict interpetation if that meant also striking down fair labor laws, social security, and of course, maintaining slavery followed by apartheid in the South?
I agree with Dr. Dobson that Roe was the worst decision the Supreme Court made in the area of personal privacy rights because of what it contributed to, a horrific holocaust. However, since it's that serious, the Pro-Life movement needs a newer face, not just a frustrated old wannabe political boss who's just discovered he's lost his clout for good.
HERE IT GOES: JIM DOBSON --
DO YOU WANT TO BE AMERICA'S SPIRITUAL BOSS?
or --
WHAT MAKES YOU QUALIFIED TO BE AMERICA'S SPIRITUAL BOSS?
or --
MANY CHRISTIANS WHO DISAGREE WITH YOU ON DIFFERING THEOLOGICAL POINTS MIGHT TAKE EXCEPTION TO YOUR CHARACTERIZATION OF SENATOR OBAMA'S VIEW OF CHRISTIANITY AND SCRIPTURE: ARE THEY FRUITCAKES?
Make no mistake, Dobson's attack on Obama today was no sudden outburst of frustration from a prominent evangelical activist who's been frustrated in getting a satisfactory answer from Senator Obama. Far from it. It was an ideologically planned and carefully calculated swipe at Obama.
If you'll excuse me, it was a theologically-inspired political "bitch slap" if I ever saw one.
Although I'd like to vote for Obama based on many of his other ideas, I am conscience-bound to withhold my vote for the Illinois legislator due to his stands on abortion and embryonic stem-cell research. In this respect, I share the same moral opinion as Dobson's.
But if you were to take those two issues off the table, I most likely would vote for Obama and not McCain, who's never been a giant when it came to honoring the wall of separation of expedience from religion in politics. In fact both candidates are far from sinless in this respect. But McCain never has struck me as a guy who'd allow any form of higher principles--even if wrongly construed--to impede his political ambitions.
Take a look at what Focus On The Family, which Dobson founded and controls, provided for the Associated Press:
The conservative Christian group provided The Associated Press with an advance copy of the pre-taped radio segment, which runs 18 minutes and highlights excerpts of a speech Obama gave in June 2006 to the liberal Christian group Call to Renewal. Obama mentions Dobson in the speech.
James Dobson says Barack Obama, who supports abortion rights,
is trying to govern by the "lowest common denominator of morality,"
labeling it "a fruitcake interpretation of the Constitution."
"Even if we did have only Christians in our midst, if we expelled every non-Christian from the United States of America, whose Christianity would we teach in the schools?" Obama said. "Would we go with James Dobson's or Al Sharpton's?" referring to the civil rights leader.
Dobson took aim at examples Obama cited in asking which biblical passages should guide public policy -- chapters like Leviticus, which Obama said suggests slavery is okay and eating shellfish is an abomination, or Jesus' Sermon on the Mount, "a passage that is so radical that it's doubtful that our own Defense Department would survive its application."
"Folks haven't been reading their Bibles," Obama said.
Dobson and Minnery accused Obama of wrongly equating Old Testament texts and dietary codes that no longer apply to Jesus' teachings in the New Testament. "I think he's deliberately distorting the traditional understanding of the Bible to fit his own worldview, his own confused theology," Dobson said. Added Minnery: "... He is dragging biblical understanding through the gutter."
James Dobson says Barack Obama, who supports abortion rights,
is trying to govern by the "lowest common denominator of morality,"
labeling it "a fruitcake interpretation of the Constitution."
"Even if we did have only Christians in our midst, if we expelled every non-Christian from the United States of America, whose Christianity would we teach in the schools?" Obama said. "Would we go with James Dobson's or Al Sharpton's?" referring to the civil rights leader.
Dobson took aim at examples Obama cited in asking which biblical passages should guide public policy -- chapters like Leviticus, which Obama said suggests slavery is okay and eating shellfish is an abomination, or Jesus' Sermon on the Mount, "a passage that is so radical that it's doubtful that our own Defense Department would survive its application."
"Folks haven't been reading their Bibles," Obama said.
Dobson and Minnery accused Obama of wrongly equating Old Testament texts and dietary codes that no longer apply to Jesus' teachings in the New Testament. "I think he's deliberately distorting the traditional understanding of the Bible to fit his own worldview, his own confused theology," Dobson said. Added Minnery: "... He is dragging biblical understanding through the gutter."
What Dobson did here isn't new, unethical or shady. He's only doing what all talk show hosts have done for years. The problem is that he basically "proof text'd" Obama and used remarks made two years ago to set the candidate up for a blistering attack as opposed to holding a reasonable point-counterpoint broadcast and letting the listeners decide for themselves.
LIke I said above, it was a "bitch slap."
Obama was half-right when he responded to Dobson's rant by saying "Folks haven't been reading their Bibles." Senator, alot of Dobson's biggest evangelical followers and donors to Focus On The Family read their Bibles every day. The problem lies in not only what they don't read, but how they interpret what they do read.
By and large, these folks are literalists when it comes to Biblical interpretation. To borrow an old saying "The Bible says it, I believe it, that settles it." What Obama was only trying to say was you can't simply take the (Christian) Bible that was originally written by Jews then the Catholics (who also compiled it in the Fourth century a.d.) -- and apply it word for word in today's society and do justice to both the Bible and the faithful, be they Catholic or Protestant.
Does Jim Dobson like lobsters and crabs? Kills those goodbye. If he doesn't want Obama in the White House, he'd better remember that old saying, "So goes Maine." Maine's lobster business employs a lot of potential voters. Does he support a strong national defense, including the use, God forbid, of nuclear weapons, one day if necessary? A lot of voters work in defense, both in uniform and keeping the "arsenal of democracy" fully stocked.
Obama only used the "Sermon On The Mount" not to ridicule what Jesus said as irrelevant, but to demonstrate that there are times when a president, in the fufilfillment of carrying out the constitutional duties of the office he swore to fulfill--on a Bible--no less, any Christian president would invariably have to cross the grain of the very words as written in the Bible itself. And there are lots of instances where killing are expressedly forbidden.
Obama's reference to the nitpicky parts of the Bible and the more problematical teachings were carefully made to illustrate just how difficult it is to govern and lead a legally secular nation in times when there are so many issues affecting us in so many ways. You are not going to please everyone. That's the last thing I want to see in a president. On the other hand, you have to realize that not everybody is a White Evangelical Protestant Christian, nor was this nation also founded as an expressedly Christian nation.
Obama's views aren't mine, but I'd have never given any thoughts to calling them the "lowest common denominator of morality" or his views on abortion "a fruitcake interpretation of the Constitution."
In fact, calling Roe decision "a fruitcake interpretation" only depreciated the seriousness of its ramifications. Strict constitutionalists love harping on the "good old days" when judges would just look at the law and say, well, that's that...the plaintiff/defendant wins/loses ... and let's call it a day is a fantasy world look at law as well. However dearly I'd love to have seen the Constitution just as loosely intrepeted to dismiss Roe, how on earth could I also defend strict interpetation if that meant also striking down fair labor laws, social security, and of course, maintaining slavery followed by apartheid in the South?
I agree with Dr. Dobson that Roe was the worst decision the Supreme Court made in the area of personal privacy rights because of what it contributed to, a horrific holocaust. However, since it's that serious, the Pro-Life movement needs a newer face, not just a frustrated old wannabe political boss who's just discovered he's lost his clout for good.
| 56 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog
