Welcome to the professional website and personal weblog of Jeremy Del Rio. Whether you're a client, friend, or curious onlooker, please don't stay a spectator. Engage the conversation. Your contributions matter here.
« Inter-Generational Wisdom | Home | And so ended years of angry denials by one of the world’s most celebrated athletes. »
Dr. Dobson’s Values Test
By Jeremy | October 5, 2007
After two hours of deliberation, we voted on a resolution that can be summarized as follows: If neither of the two major political parties nominates an individual who pledges himself or herself to the sanctity of human life, we will join others in voting for a minor-party candidate. Those agreeing with the proposition were invited to stand. The result was almost unanimous. The other issue discussed at length concerned the advisability of creating a third party if Democrats and Republicans do indeed abandon the sanctity of human life and other traditional family values. Though there was some support for the proposal, no consensus emerged. Speaking personally, and not for the organization I represent or the other leaders gathered in Salt Lake City, I firmly believe that the selection of a president should begin with a recommitment to traditional moral values and beliefs. Those include the sanctity of human life, the institution of marriage, and other inviolable pro-family principles. Only after that determination is made can the acceptability of a nominee be assessed.Someday it would be nice to hear Dobson describe "other inviolable pro-family principles" as broader than abortion and marriage. What about "true religion" James describes: caring for orphans and widows. Does that count? What about racial justice and health care and juvenile justice and education reform? Do they count? Hmm...
Topics: james dobson, news, politics, religious right | 11 Comments »
October 5th, 2007 at 12:29 pm
My thoughts exactly when I read his column Jeremy. Additionally, I couldn’t believe he didn’t mention the war at all, never mind discussing it as a pro-life issue. (I’m not making a statement on its initial veracity, just it’s ongoing failures.)
October 5th, 2007 at 2:12 pm
It was the last sentence in the column that caught my eye:
“If the major political parties decide to abandon conservative principles, the cohesion of pro-family advocates will be all too apparent in 2008. ”
This is what Christ-followers do in James Dobson’s world: they make threats.
October 5th, 2007 at 3:23 pm
it’s too bad that his pro-family values don’t include these things (you mention) that hit so close to home and that seem to have even greater reaching effects (which if fixed may contribute to strengthen moral values as well as the sanctity of human life). Just a thought.
October 5th, 2007 at 5:39 pm
At least from my perspective, I agree with Dr. Dobson. I think the sanctity of marriage is pretty cut and dry, designed for a man and a woman. So if our nation is already so lost about something that seems so cut and dry, if he were to try to bring up any of those worthy topics you described, what would be accomplished? Those issues have a solution for as many homeruns as Alex Rodriguez will have when he retires. And Dr. Dobson’s ministry has been primarily on those specific issues. Our ministries have been focused on orphans and widows and juvenile justice and those things, so we should be attempting to stand on a political platform for those issues ourselves.
October 5th, 2007 at 9:41 pm
It is astounding to me that the Religious Right, with all it’s talk of outlawing abortion, does not see the other factors connected to eradicating abortion, such as education reform, job security, poverty reduction. Legislation alone will not solve the abortion problem. Unless we are willing to come under people and serve them by taking care of those both in and out of the womb, we’ll never make any real headway.
October 8th, 2007 at 10:50 am
It seems horribly short-sighted to say that being pro-life begins with the sanctity of marriage. It begins with a vision of what a full, flourishing and worthwhile life would look like.
October 9th, 2007 at 5:26 pm
I believe the thinking is that a focus on the watershed issues is better than dilutiion that would come from emphasizing the entire realm of important ones. I think Dobson thinks that abortion is the ultimate injustice issue of our day, the sanctioned murder of defenseless voiceless human life, and that the destruction of marriage, resulting in complete social chaos and massive harm to children, are the two places where focus is necessary, hoping that a change in those issues would open up possibilities for addressing the other imporant ones. I am sure that he would applaud the rest on your list and does care about them… caring for orphans and widows, racial justice, health care, juvenile justice and education reform, etc. But I think they feel that better health care and better schools in a culture that continues to abort life is getting the chairs orderly on the Titanic. So I think it is a question of emphasis, but you’d have to ask ‘them’, I am not a legslative moralist.
October 12th, 2007 at 12:16 am
Ok, i am just wandering how the sanctity of life does not include broader issues than abortion. does not the war on iraq show a lack of sanctity of life? also, does not the real threat on the issue of marriage and families in america lie in the realm of divorce and not having the gay community as our scapegoat. i will tell you the real destruction of the family is divorce, not the small minority of people who struggle for the right to marry someone of the same sex. if we put all the money, time and other resources into that issue. i have not done the research, but i am telling you the other of abortion, sexual identity issues and the value of family will be saved as well. j-lou is so confused at times by dobson. he has a great heart, but he just does not get it. peace.
October 13th, 2007 at 7:02 am
So he wants to introduce a third party candidate to assure the courts that determine sanctity of life issues, religious freedoms, etc. go to the liberal judges for decades to come. Not to bright. What’s wrong with that picture? Surprisingly short sited.
October 27th, 2007 at 5:52 am
I wonder if Mr. Dobson reads the same Bible that talks about how if you just love your family then you are no better then serpents because serpents love their young to. I also am getting tired to the self-serving, self-satisfied practice of family-values that ends up being “my family over yours” plus some cheap, dramatic moral gesture that really doesn’t cost us anything in the way of humbleness and sacrifice versus how “righteous” it makes us feel. It’s like the masked narcissism of the wealthy that will go across the world, spend hundreds of thousands and risk life and death, including of others, to climb a mountain to “Feel alive” and “in charge” but can’t get off there butt to feel alive and in charge to befriend the poor family on the other side of town as that’s not as romantic and doesn’t give back to stroking the ego as climbing the mountain.
December 13th, 2014 at 1:37 am
[...] Dr. Dobson’s Values Test – If someone asked me, in principle if I was pro-life or pro-family, I would have to say yes. In my view any Christian must consider families to be important and must be in favour of a full embrace of a life lived in hope. However, it’s clear that what I might mean by pro-life and pro-family are a long way from what Mr Dobson is saying. [...]