It has never ceased to amaze me (though no longer surprise me) how Dobson and Focus on the Family will twist, distort, and exaggerate. Listening to Dobson's comment yesterday, I had to choose between: Is Dobson that unashamedly devious or pathetically ignorant?
He said of Obama's 2006 "Call to Renewal" speech:
"He's trying to make the case that it is anti-democratic to believe or fight for moral principles in the Bible that are not supported by people of all faiths. Or presumably by those of no faith....What the senator is saying there in essence is that I can't seek to pass legislation for example that bans partial-birth abortion because there are people in the culture who don't see that as a moral issue. And if I can't get everyone to agree with me, it is undemocratic to try to pass legislation that I find offensive to the Scripture. Now that is a fruitcake interpretation of the Constitution. This is why we have elections, to support what we believe to be wise and moral. We don't have to go to the lowest common denominator of morality, which is what he is suggesting....What he is trying to say here is unless everybody agrees we have no right to fight for what we believe. I thank God that that is not what the Constitution says."
Sorry Dobson... go back and listen to the speech again (DID you listen to it?). Obama is not saying that he cannot pursue moral legislation unless it is ok with people of all faiths. He is saying that if his moral view is founded in scripture, he must find a way to argue his case to someone who does not accept the validity of scripture.
Here is what Obama said:
"Democracy demands that the religiously motivated translate their concerns into universal, rather than religion-specific, values. It requires that their proposals be subject to argument, and amenable to reason. I may be opposed to abortion for religious reasons, but if I seek to pass a law banning the practice, I cannot simply point to the teachings of my church or evoke God's will. I have to explain why abortion violates some principle that is accessible to people of all faiths, including those with no faith at all."
What is saddest of all is that millions of Christians will take what Dobson says as gospel ... without ever looking into it themselves.
HT: Chad B.
5 comments:
Thanks for posting this. I saw Dobson's comments on the news yesterday and had the same reaction to his twisting of Obama's words for his own political agenda (speaking of "lowest common denomonator").
I'm not sure it really impacts the election, though, would it?. The people listening to Dobson are overwhelmingly Republican already and didn't need any further reasons not to vote for Obama.
Red - No, I don't think it really does much to the election. However, I do think this has more to do with who "speaks" for Evangelicals. I think there are a number of evangelicals who, if they listened to the Call To Renewal speech, might find that they relate to Obama on a spiritual level even if not on a political one. For many folks in the Religious Right, that is a scary thought - best to snuff out that spark.
You'll enjoy this if you haven't seen this already:
http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/index.jhtml?episodeId=174782
Somebody brought this up in the bible class I taught yesterday. Ha!
Made me think of your blog again.
Post a Comment