This month, Dr. James Dobson, along with about 50 other pro-life leaders, signed his name to a resolution stating that “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.” Many anti-Rudy conservatives have jumped on board with Dr. Dobson, heralding this resolution is a return to conservative logic. Really?“I don’t like the fact that my party just nominated a pro-choice candidate with a sketchy family life who by his own admission is a nominal Catholic. I don’t care that he has promised to nominate judges like Scalia, Thomas, and Roberts to the SC–the only branch of government through which Roe will fall–or that he has a proven track record of being tough on organized crime (the local version of terrorism). I don’t care that he served as chief executive of the third largest government in the US and was the third highest-ranking official in the justice department before that. I don’t care that he turned an ungovernable city that nearly filed bankruptcy less than two decades earlier into the tourism, commerce, cultural, live entertainment, fashion, media, and business capital of the country if not the world. I don’t care that he may be the only candidate who can win 271 electoral votes [try it]. He and I disagree on 20% of our politics, so I’m going to take my 25% of the GOP and line them up behind the a third-party candidate, which will invariably turn the election towards an adamantly pro-choice Great Society Democrat who uses the church as a political tool, whose family problems were the story of the 90s and disgraced the presidency, who will nominate judges who will do everything in their power to further abortion rights, who has never had executive experience, who is dead wrong on terrorism, and who I think is wrong on 98% of her politics. I’m glad America has me. What would the pro-choice movement do without me? How could anyone think I’m wrong?”
How is this logical at all??? I respect Dr. Dobson, but he couldn’t be more wrong. I don’t know what happened to him, and honestly, its sad. He’s become a painful ideologue out of touch with reality who is being completely irresponsible with the great power he has.
When Dr. Dobson speaks, people listen. He should be a uniter, not a divider. He shouldn’t be voting in the negative and announcing it in the NYT. If he wants to support Mike Huckabee (who I suspect he will eventually support), that’s fine by me. I think he should support Huckabee if that’s where his heart is. Rather than saying who has it wrong, why not tell us who has it right and try and further the ideals you share? That’s what the party needs.Dr. Dobson made a few other comments in an interview with Sean Hannity I feel impelled to comment on:
- “You’re taking Rudy’s word on his intention to appoint strict constructionists to the Supreme Court”–You have Rudy’s word that he will appoint Constructionists and some sketchy deduction telling you he’s untrustworthy versus Hillary’s adamant word that she will appoint Harry Blackmun 2.0. Hmmm still gotta choose the former.
- “You’ve got a few issues that you base this on, but I just don’t agree with them”–I didn’t catch the whole quote and didn’t care enough to go back and rewatch it, but he basically said Hannity was taking a few issues and making his case while he, Dr. D, was looking at the whole range of issues and making an informed decision. Forgive me, but I only heard Dr. Dobson talk about maybe 3 or 4 issues, while I heard Sean Hannity go across the political spectrum and admit the top-3’s weaknesses while extolling their strengths. I think Dr. Dobson was playing role reversal there.
- “There are many, many ways that a president can influence [the abortion policy]“–Reagan was the most articulate proponent of the pro-life cause ever to sit in the Oval Office, maybe to ever open his mouth. He commanded the bully pulpit like no one before or after him. “Abortion and the National Conscience” is one of the greatest op-eds of the past 30 years. Yet Reagan couldn’t bring down abortion without a Constructionist court. Yes, the president can work behind the scenes to bring abortion down, but he needs to get the right people on the bench. Then, and only then, can the president really help bring down that infernal decision.
- “You’re assuming that the election is going to be tomorrow. It is 13 months away. Things change.”–Yes, the election seems far off and in some ways is. A new candidate could pop in from stage right and save the day. Maybe, hopefully, let’s pray for it. But does that mean we don’t prepare for worse? Let’s look at it another way. From listening to Dobson’s teachings, I know that he believes that Jesus will return for his followers one day like a thief in the night, meaning that there’s a chance Dobson will never die. He believes it, as do I. But, forgive the speculation, but there’s not a lot I wouldn’t bet to say that Dobson also holds a life insurance policy and a will. But if Jesus could come back before his death, why take out a life insurance policy? Isn’t that what we really want? Why write a will? Is he a hypocrite? Has he compromised his conviction? Of course not, he’s just having a plan if things don’t go the way he hoped. That plan may have cost him something (his monthly premiums), but its better than leaving his loved ones with piles of debt and confusion.
We’re talking about the life of our country and our unborn children. He may think that a Rudy presidency will stop the right from fighting abortion (which is ridiculous), but making this stand will only push the day Roe falls out of his lifetime and maybe out of ours. If Hillary is elected, the 1-3 SC judges who will be replaced in the next four years will be as young as they are progressive. How long will they be on the bench–15, 20, 25 years? We’ll lose any ground we gained with Alito and Roberts and then some. How many millions of babies will die because of this? Maybe a better option will present itself. But that doesn’t mean we don’t take out a life insurance policy–planning in supporting the best man (or woman) for the job who shares most of our values who stands a chance in November. One stat from that interview says it all:
Hillary- 48%
Rudy- 30%
Dobson-supported third candidate- 14%
Where’s the logic in this? Where’s the common sense in giving the election to a woman who will nominate a justice who will do everything short of opening a Planned Parenthood in their office, who will be sitting on the bench for upwards of 20 years, to propagate the pro-life cause?That’s the slow and painful death of the pro-life movement, and there’s nothing logical about that.
