Dobson Coddles the Coddlers

There is a very interesting post over at the TPM Cafe website on James Dobson’s officially released statement regarding “Foleygate”. In short, when a Republican is caught soliciting underage Congressional interns for homosexual encounters, it’s the fault of the “oversexualization of American society” but when a Democrat has concensual sex with an adult, it’s simply the shameful moral failure of that individual.

It would be interesting to see how Dobson would react if there were Democrat leaders in Congress who knowingly turned a blind eye to a fellow Democrat’s soliciting of underage boys for homosexual encounters. Because right now, he doesn’t seem to have a problem with this same behaviour on the other side of the aisle. You gotta feel for Jimmy D. It’s difficult speaking truth to power when your own crusade for power and influence get’s in the way.

I’m just really relieved that Dobson isn’t that influential with Christians in the United States.


8 thoughts on “Dobson Coddles the Coddlers

  1. the quote concerning foley from focus on the family isn’t directly from dobson, but rather from tom minnery who is the senior vice president of government and public policy. i’m not saying that i disagree with you in the slightest regarding the spin that was put on the republican scandal vs. the deomcrat, and yes it did come from focus on the family, but it should be noted that dobson didn’t make the officially released statement. he did make the statement about president clinton, as mentioned in the tpm cafe post.

    nonetheless, i think you’re spot on with the bias coming from focus on the family/james dobson.

  2. thanks for pointing that, Joshua. When reading the statement I realized that they were Minnery’s words but him my furvor, I incorrectly attributed the quote to Dobson. With that said, I’m sure this statement was reviewed and approved by Dobson before its release.

  3. It feels to me as though it is time to begin publically repenting for the sins of our community, not merely critiquing other believers (though I certainly think such critiques are necessary and should be done with a sharp, cutting love).

    I wonder deeply if our response as Christians is merely to point out the failings of other believers, or ought we to begin publically owning (even if it was not our personal failing) the American Christian love of violence over sea, our unsympathetic, rage-filled attitude toward homosexuals, and our desire for political power.

  4. “under the cushions hide the change”.

    it seems as if there are more similarities between politicians than differences (behaviorally speaking). they will sell their constituients out to lobbysists. the only difference is who’s paying out the money.

    Jesus rode a donkey, not a war-horse, and he seemed more concerned with humanitarian issues, rather than politics….so i think i’ll try and follow his lead.

  5. I am shocked that the party that not that long ago rode into office on the moral high ground has falled so far as to not even be able to say…WE SCREWED THE POOCH!

    You have people blaming what is essentially a vast left wing conspiracy for a guy trying to seduce a boy on the internet and then blaming alchohol and an unknown priest.

    Zach, I would like to point you to the tragedy in PA. It seems the Amish have become the torch bearers of the idea of Christianity. While most people who suffered that loss would be calling for stricter gun laws, death penalty, and other knee jerk reactions to an unspeakable event…they spoke of forgiveness and support for the murderers family…inspiring.

  6. moral high ground in the political landscape is bullshit. there are no parties that can merit the support of those who call themselves christians. that, obviously, doesn’t keep some from trying to justify alligning themselves with one party or another. and even if there was a party that truly held the moral high ground, in a system that requires the suspension of religious belief while speaking in the public political forum, any real christian character becomes a meaningless label. why would followers of jesus want to say that their religious convictions aren’t good enough to serve the public’s welfare (because that is what we must say in american politics)? that sounds pretty anti-jesus to me.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s