..on his radio show today.
Okay, in theory James Dobson is a minister, so maybe he knows something about the Bible? He is not a lawyer, so I am not sure how he can explain the Constitution to a lawyer. But let's explore some of the specifics.
In terms of the Constitution, Dobson said Obama, who supports abortion rights, is trying to govern by the "lowest common denominator of morality," labeling it "a fruitcake interpretation of the Constitution." Well, I do not think that the word "abortion" can actually be found in the US Constitution, so lets get back to the Bible, which Dobson should know more about.
In the comments aired Tuesday, Dobson said Obama should not be referencing antiquated dietary codes and passages from the Old Testament that are no longer relevant to the teachings of the New Testament. (In a speech back in 2006, Obama did mention that Leviticus suggests slavery is OK and that eating shellfish is an abomination, and Deuteronomy suggests stoning your child if he strays from the faith.)
Okay, but what exactly is Dobson upset about? Show me a Christian minister who quotes those weird bits about the stonings and slavery- they don't. Yet they claim that the Bible- the whole thing not just the new testament- is the inspired and perfect word of God. Stop accusing Obama of being selective, it's you who is being selective. Yes you are partial to the new testament- but as Obama points out, Jesus' Sermon on the Mount is "a passage that is so radical that it's doubtful that our Defense Department would survive its application." Who could argue? it is what it is. "Blessed are the peacemakers", not "you are either with us or you are against us"- which you might recognize as a George W. Bush quote.
Look, the bottom line here really is not about Christianity or the Constitution, it is about election year politics. Obama is standing up and saying loudly, I am a Christian even though I do not subscribe to your political platform. It is okay for american citizens who belong to various branches of Christianity to hold varying political views. And Dobson is replying, no it's not. There is only one acceptable political view for Christians, and I have been interpreting that view to Christians for quite a while now. Gays are sinners, abortion is an abomination, and the environment was created by God for humans to use up and use as a potty- when it no longer supports human life we will be raptured up except for Democrats. Weirdly, Dobson has not backed off his statement that he could not in good conscience vote for McCain because of concerns over the Arizona senator's conservative credentials. Dobson has said he will vote in November but has suggested he might not vote for president. So mcCain is not conservative enough to get his vote, but he is still trying to stimulate some dislike of Obama just to have fun?
Okay, my viewpoint is perhaps a bit harsh on Dobson. But look at his face and tell me that I am wrong about him being a dried up intolerant dogmatist. That is not the Bible he is holding, it is mere ammunition for his worldview.
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 24
It is true that many of the the fundamentalist and/or evangelical inclination in Christendom do not look at the Old Testament very much. Those who do, note that Christ came to fulfill the law which, in part, means to help move beyond those things that hold us back. Slavery was a known entity in the Old Testament, and it served some purposes (debt repayment was one), but both Old and New Testaments teach that one should treat slaves fairly (Paul talks about treating Onesimus as a brother, though of course, there is a difference in social station).
Dr. Dobson speaks for a subset of the evangelical/fundamentalist community but not for all. Sen.. Obama can teach him something about speaking the truth in love.
That said, It is my understanding that that there are protestant sects where there is no rite of ordination, thus a person does not have to be ordained to become a preacher/minister. Therefore, I think that suggesting he is not a minister because he has not been ordained is an argument that lacks merit unless Dobson claims to be speaking as a representative of a sect that practices some rite of ordination and secondly restsricts the authority to interpret the Bible to those who have been ordained.
If that were the case Gather would have many fewer posts than currently exist.
"There is no art is finding a Biblical quotation that fits your moral or political pique."
Michael,
Can you find me some scripture that lauds homosexuality as a righteous lifestyle?
These kinds do have a following of sorts . . . he knows about the same for the Bible as he does for the Constitution. Nothing substantive.
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
Chris - may I suggest Mike Taibbi's book, The Great Derangement? He went undercover into Hagee's church. I heard him interviewed on C-Span. He basically said that this fundamentalist church focuses on certain sections of the OT that support the political views Dobson points out - Israel/Iran will be the main players in Armaggedon, which is going to happen soon; the death penalty is a command from god and must never be reversed, etc. etc. They, in Mike's words, don't even LOOK at the NT and consider Jesus a whacked-out, long-haired, hippie-freak whose teachings should NOT be adhered to.
And they actually call themselves "Christian"! These people should be put away. Religious tolerance be damned - they are more dangerous to our nation that any radical Islamic terrorist.
Why? You don't need an excuse to act on those impulses buddy. Oh . . . VERY well . . .
Love your neighbor.
"At the roadside Inn, the Samaritan took care of the man all night."
"A neighbor is a person in need. We can show love by helping people in need. That pleases God."
Of course, interpretation is the key, isn't it? Now can you show me abortion in the Constitution? :)
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
http://rackjite.com/archives/1546-Jon-Stewart-Interviews-Mike-Taibbi-About-Reverend-Hagee.html
scaring and threatening is not very educational in my opinion,
also i dont see how marrying the same gender does the same harm as abortion.
I agree that abortion is brutal and is in fact killing , however having said that, i also believe that child abuse and women who are not capable of raising children forced to have them or use illegal abortions is also very bad for society, as things were before abortion was legal , women were dying because of illegal abortions, or killing babies aFTER they were born, is that better?
no, the answer must be finding the middle way, not extremes
using slogans such as family first etc, reminds me of the book 1984
i think that dobson is far more dangerous to society than anything the liberals support..
and by the way what is wrong with 6 couples marrying eachother is that is what they want? narrow minded tunnel vision does more harm than allowing consenting adults to their rights to live as they wish , as they see fit as long as they do not harm others
otherwise you find yourself in iran sentencing to death those who break the marital vows
I believe that abortion numbers have been coming down, and I believe it is partly a matter of less intercourse and partly a matter of those having intercourse showing more willingness to treat it as an adult matter and use contraceptives. I have no problem with either solution.
Fran, you link abortion to immorality and promiscuity. Not always true. If we are to discuss polygamy, it should be noted that it is practiced by a very conservative group in southern Utah that is strongly religious. Groups marriage is not much of a liberal thing actually. Liberals figure if you are going to have sex with someone, it is no longer legally necessary to marry. Marry six couples? Forget it, too complicated and too legally messy. Have an orgy and go home if you want to behave like a sap. Elizabeth Taylor could have saved herself a great deal of heartache if she had not married every crush. .
I have never had sex outside my marriage, and I am quite glad of that fact. Humans always think that they can separate sexuality and love, but in fact it rarely works. Faithfulness and monogamy are great things. I am just saying, why should those who make mistakes in their sexual lives inflict the full payment for the mistake not on themselves, but on their children?
some of us are one or the other, of course.