Dobson, places too much importance on his own endorsements. unfortunately so do many of his follower who would rather throw out the baby with the bath-water than take a chance on someone who espouses most of the founding principles of this country.
I guess Bauer didn’t get his marching orders from Dobson...
That would be Gary Bauer.
..you who was once held in high esteem by Dobson & millions of other Evangelicals until your fall from grace.
Nice pile-on.~extreme sarcasm
It’s time to win votes for Thompson by bashing Dobson for not being a supporter.
That’ll work.
Well it looks like Dobson has removed himself from relevance.
Gary Bauer has stepped up to fill the void.
So long James, it was nice while it lasted.
I never figured a lobbyist for abortionists could find a lot of supporters among Christian conservatives.
One hand: I agree with everything Bauer is quoted as saying.
Other hand: I respect Dobson much more highly than Bauer.
Gary Bauer. The guy who endorsed McCain in 2000 when he withdrew from the race.
No surprises here.
That'll pull in about 10 votes for Thompson.
Now Jack Bauer... that'd help Thompson. LOL!
They treat Christianity as just another political pressure group ... and thereby jettison the One Thing that makes us different from political pressure groups.
Not that Christians shouldn't be aware and active ... but this stuff reminds me of this passage:
But he turned and said to Peter, "Get behind me, Satan! You are a hindrance to me. For you are not setting your mind on the things of God, but on the things of man." (Matt. 16:23)
Three things about Dobson’s comment.
First, it was private. That might have been an IRS thing, to distinguish him from his organization. But more likely it was a privately expressed opinion, and he hadn’t yet really made up his mind to speak out. It’s not like Dobson to leak emails. That’s not his M.O.
Second, Dobson is one of those guys who is a purist. If he makes up his mind that a defense of marriage amendment is the only way to go, then he casts out anyone who tries to seek the same ends by a different route.
Third, or to come at that second point from another direction, it’s not that Thompson supports gay marriage. He opposes a constitutional amendment for prudential reasons, because he thinks it’s not the best way to reach the goal. Maybe because he knows it won’t pass, and therefore is merely a distraction; maybe because it makes a federal issue out of what should be a state issue. But it’s clearly wrong to say that Fred MUST support passage of the amendment or else. It’s not unreasonable to argue that there are better and more workable ways to pursue the issue.
For instance, of course “marriage” is between a man and a woman. It has been in every language and culture for the past 2000 years, and thousands of years before that. What, do we have to amend the Constitution every time the leftists arbitrarily change the language? That could involve thousands of amendments. To dignify this stupidity with a constitutional amendment is to dignify the agenda-driven leftists’ manipulation of the language.
We will only escape this trap by electing or appointing honest judges, who will grant that when the Constitution or common law say “man,” for example, that means “human being” first and “male of the species” second, as it has done for thousands of years until the language was reconstructed by leftists. The same with “marriage.”
We don’t need no stinkin’ amendment. The law is already clear. We need honest judges, politicians, reporters, and school teachers, who will stop playing these manipulative language games.
It’ll be interesting to see who Tony Perkins, the current Presidemt of the Family Research Counci, decides is okay to represent religious conservatives.
James Dobson is obviously in the New Gingrich camp. After Newt`s open confession to Father Dobson, he’s in like flynn. Barf!
Baptist ping
This may be the only time I have ever disagreed
with The Good Doctor.
Why don’t these people just preach the Gospel and stay out of politics?!?!?
I see Hunter’s 2% of supporters have weighed in on the thread. Typical.
Gary Bauer supports Fred Thompson?
Then that’s another reason why I won’t. Thanks for the info.
Dobson is being too particular on this one. I’d support a federal marriage amendment, but leaving it to the states in the federalist style of government is also a good solution. In fact, letting federalism take care of this one has its own advantages. First of all, if the federal govt decides to define marriage as one man and one woman, what’s to stop them from changing that definition later if they should so choose? Secondly, if it’s left to the several States and your state makes a decision on the matter you don’t like...there’s always the next state over. This will likely also have the positive side effect of confining the radical gay rights activists to a few already liberal states, thus getting them out of our hair.
How about getting the government out of marriage altogether? Why does the state have any jurisdiction over family relationships in the first place?