Not only does Focus on the Family not endorse candidates (wink wink), now James Dobson assures us that they’re not even political!!
DOBSON: All right, we’re right around the corner from an election.
BENNETT: Yup.
DOBSON: And here at Focus on the Family, we’re not political. We do care a lot about the issues, but would it not be appropriate to say to our listeners, regardless of what your political affiliation is, and regardless of how you see the candidates that are going to be voted on very shortly, I beg you to think about the security of this nation and ask yourself, “Do the people that I’m putting in power understand this threat, and are they willing to confront it?”
Such disclaimers help protect an organization’s tax status. Or so they think. I have the feeling that sooner or later the shit is going to hit the fan, but we’ll see.
By the way, right before saying “we’re not political,” he said this:
Isn’t it amazing that there’s such a sizable number of people in the media and in the liberal community that despise this country and its freedoms, and they’re doing everything they can to undermine it?
Yep! Sounds like a totally non-political animal to me!
Listen to the audio here: Not Political
Oh.. and today’s headline from the Denver Post:
Dobson Warns of Fallout if Democrats Take Congress.
This guy is McCarthy in Mr. Rogers’ clothing. He is one very dangerous power hungry fundementalist wacko.
who….
He described a liberal Democratic takeover of key congressional committees, a paralyzed Bush administration, and crippling setbacks in battles against abortion and gay marriage.
Gosh, isn’t “liberal Democratic” redundant? đ
And then the oxymoron of: “Bush administration”.
Well done KB, well done.
James Dobson, always good for a laugh. Or nightmare.
Putting his face up next to others is supposed to convince me of what? Since when is the notion of people trying to undermine the country new or political? (choose your definition of ‘political’ carefully here)
So what if he is ‘political’?! By some definitions of political, no one can avoid being political.
Has anyone ever listened to more than an hour’s worth of his radio program?
They’re not political ….Just like this BLOG is not political.
I used to work for a Christian radio company and we aired Dobson’s program. It was nothing but issue oriented programming. The topics were always political. They may not endorse candidates, but the issues they promote match those of the most conservative of Republicans. I don’t think they ever agreed with any Democrat on an issue.
#6 and your use of “probably” here means you have no clue what you’re saying, right?
And I’m sure you get just as upset when black churches have Democrats giving campaign speeches every two years?
His values, perception, and ideas are based in what he holds as absolute truth – the Bible. Truth is A-Political.
This “Christian bashing” “pro-liberal” blog knows nothing of balance.
Theyâre not political âŚ.Just like this BLOG is not political.
The blog is not a 501(c)(3) org. Do you people really not understand the difference? You’re kidding me, right?
These guys are no more political than the NAACP. Just issues oriented that does not promote any particular party.
#11
Actually I do. Churches have no place in the system in my opinion.
#12
The Bible is bullshit, but keep believing – I need low paid lawn work & you and your kid are perfect for it. I can entertain you for hours by just turning on a light bulb and crying out “Its a miracle, is a miracle!!”.
#12, the problem I have is not with his believing he is following Biblical principles. The problem here is that absolute integrity, including intellectual honesty, is one of the first requirements of the Christian life. To say “we’re not political” and then to go on about how bad the liberal democrats are is completely disingenuous. It’s fine for Christians to be political. It’s not fine to pretend you aren’t.
(You are right, truth is apolitical. I’m pretty sure God disapproves of the Democrats almost as much as the Republicans).
A follow-up to my last comment:
On the blog we also don’t claim not to be political. Dobson does. Are you saying you believe that his org is not political, or do you rather think that he is a liar? There are only two choices.
#6 and your use of âprobablyâ here means you have no clue what youâre saying, right?
No.
What “probably” means is that nobody knows exactly what went on between these two gentlemen, but of the many journalists who have written about their relationship, most attribute their current animosity to financial disagreements.
Seemed simpler just to say “probably”, but whatever.
Is he your dad or something? You seem bitter.
“Dobson warns of fallout if Democrats take Congress”
Maybe James Dobson will fall out of power. Kewl!
I do hope this guy isn’t related to John Dobson, the inventor of the Dobsonian telescope. Though if the guy actually looked through the telescope, maybe he’d get the idea that our Universe is a lot bigger and older than he thinks, and he’d get off his high horse.
16 Itâs fine for Christians to be political. Itâs not fine to pretend you arenât.
Agreed.
I know KB left out a letter, namely G as in KGB. What a NAZI thug, fellow travelers unit K(G)B will lead you in a non-political discussion.
Is it a crime to be political?
Like being called a racist, are people supposed to desist from a discussion or avocating a different world view just because someone says it’s “political”.
So a Christian exercised his right to free speech, debate the issues do go around the act like a NAZI thug and call names. What’s next all Chistian involved in politics have to wear crosses to we know who are the dangerous elements in the political sphere?
Yeap, J.Dobson is political. How dare he have an opion, that’s the lone domain of the educated leftist/communist/Stalinist/NAZI amoral majority.
Really how dare someone be political, but then what is political. Taxes are political. Laws affecting abortion, marriage effect morals and thus are political. Educatioin is political and since education is a reflection of the values of society this also reflect our morals.
Exactly what is not really a political issue, espcially if it involves laws.
I know the pictures are supposed to frame the discussion, and for the knaves I suppose it does. The entire tone of the blog is just too judgemental and elitist. Fine if you’re a atheist or pagan then don’t believe in Christ, no one is making you. I don’t see the same concern when Muslims commit their acts of violence. For the most part this entier blog acts as though the Muslims weren’t around, or is it really a racist tendency that makes the bloggers here ignore them totally as though they didn’t matter?
Hey Traxx. nobody cares…unless there is a tax scam involved/ Now tell me…you like this Dobson guy? Seriously. You do? Wild.
#21 – well said!
#16 – since the Bible is such bull$hit; perhaps you’d like a review of the principles on which this country was founded; overwhelmingly Christian. Not bad for being founded on the Bible.
“We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We have staked the future .. upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to sustain ourselves, according to the Ten Commandments of God.” – James Madison (that’s the architect of the constitution and 5th president of the US for those in the Massachusetts school system)
From the Denver Post article: Dobson said Tuesday’s broadcast was paid for by Focus on the Family Action, which, unlike the main nonprofit ministry Focus on the Family, can speak out about candidates and parties.
So, Focus on the Family enjoys the tax benefits of being nonprofit and as such should not endorse or denounce candidates for political office. Yet they can do exactly that by using a shell game and claim that such speech is paid for by their Focus on the Family ACTION division? Sounds like they want to have their cake and eat it too.
#23, Stiffler,
Ok, so you can post a quote from John Madison. I don’t know if he actually wrote those words or not. You see, it doesn’t matter. What matters is what made it into the Constitution and ended up being ratified, not the rhetoric around it.
If you read the original Constitution, you will note, that a black man is only worth 3/5th of a free white man. Now, do you defend that too? You claim it is based on the bible, so what gives?
Or if you want to quote the bible, could you dig up the part where King David and King Saul had how many wives each? How many wives does Dobson have? Is he a good god fearing man?
#23: Please read the First Amendment again:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”
That clause about respecting an establishment of religion means that the government may not establish any religion as official. None. It also may not prohibit the free exercise of religion.
The Founding Fathers, particularly Washington (a Mason, but effectively a Deist), Jefferson (an agnostic if not an atheist), and Franklin (maybe a Rosicrucian), were not particularly religious, but neither wanted to ban religion or establish a state religion. That’s why religion was intended to be kept out of government, and why it should be continued to be kept out of governmnt. That’s why politicking by a church should continue to be grounds for that church to lose its nonprofit status, just like any other nonprofit.
I used to like James Dobson — and even respect him some — when his focus was in the family. But when he got into politics I totally lost all respect for him.
#21 Oh look, Godwin’s law.
You’re an idiot for putting James Dobson next to Hitler. This is beyond the pale.
#28, I’m still wondering about the NAZI KGB thug. Does that count as an oxymoron or just an idiotic comment.
>What matters is what made it into the Constitution and ended up being ratified
So I’m sure you’ll never argue that the Constitution calls for a separation of church and state.