Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Values Test
NY Times ^ | October 4, 2007 | By JAMES C. DOBSON

Posted on 10/03/2007 10:36:53 PM PDT by neverdem

REPORTS have surfaced in the press about a meeting that occurred last Saturday in Salt Lake City involving more than 50 pro-family leaders. The purpose of the gathering was to discuss our response if both the Democratic and Republican Parties nominate standard-bearers who are supportive of abortion. Although I was neither the convener nor the moderator of the meeting, I’d like to offer several brief clarifications about its outcome and implications.

After two hours of deliberation, we voted on a resolution that can be summarized as follows: 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. Those agreeing with the proposition were invited to stand. The result was almost unanimous.

The other issue discussed at length concerned the advisability of creating a third party if Democrats and Republicans do indeed abandon the sanctity of human life and other traditional family values. Though there was some support for the proposal, no consensus emerged.

Speaking personally, and not for the organization I represent or the other leaders gathered in Salt Lake City, I firmly believe that the selection of a president should begin with a recommitment to traditional moral values and beliefs. Those include the sanctity of human life, the institution of marriage, and other inviolable pro-family principles. Only after that determination is made can the acceptability of a nominee be assessed.

The other approach, which I find problematic, is to choose a candidate according to the likelihood of electoral success or failure. Polls don’t measure right and wrong; voting according to the possibility of winning or losing can lead directly to the compromise of one’s principles. In the present political climate, it could result in the abandonment of...

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Editorial; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: abortion; dobson; election2008; electionpresident; jamescdobson
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-67 next last
James C. Dobson, founder and chairman of the evangelical organization Focus on the Family Action, is the author of “Bringing Up Boys: Practical Advice and Encouragement for Those Shaping the Next Generation of Men.”
1 posted on 10/03/2007 10:36:54 PM PDT by neverdem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Well, that’s a fast fifty votes for Huckabee.


2 posted on 10/03/2007 10:42:19 PM PDT by Rudder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Dobson wants Hilary to win.

I am not kidding.


3 posted on 10/03/2007 10:43:50 PM PDT by tdewey10 (Can we please take out iran's nuclear capability before they start using it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

As much as I admire Rudy for his service during 9/11, I agree with James Dobson. There needs to be a values test for the social conservative voter.


4 posted on 10/03/2007 10:45:42 PM PDT by nowandlater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

I’m more shocked that the NYT actually printed a letter from Dobson!


5 posted on 10/03/2007 10:50:53 PM PDT by Joann37
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tdewey10

And just where can I verify that statement?


6 posted on 10/03/2007 10:56:30 PM PDT by Frwy (Proud member of the vast right wing conspiracy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: tdewey10
Motivated no doubt by schadenfreude, The New York Times has found this news fit to print.

We shall see who ultimately bears the pain and who the joy on the issue of abortion.

In the meantime, Dobson is perfectly right to stand by his position on this transcendent issue. To Dobson and many of us, the issue is our modern equivalent of national independence from Britain in the 18th century and slavery in the 19th century.

We speak here not of tax cuts, highway bills, or midnight appropriations, we speak, after all, of killing babies. There can be no equivocation, no flirting with appeasers, no compromise.

Here we stand, we can do no other.


7 posted on 10/03/2007 11:00:49 PM PDT by nathanbedford ("I like to legislate. I feel I've done a lot of good." Sen. Robert Byrd)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford
While I tend to be pessimistic about our chances in 2008, nothing gets my hackles up more than those who say Republicans have to "soften" their position against abortion.

Abortion is the Quiet Holocaust, happening all around us while most Americans just go about their business and say it's such a shame but it HAS to happen, as if pregnancy is some airborne virus.

8 posted on 10/03/2007 11:10:01 PM PDT by Darkwolf377 (Pro-Life atheist living in Boston)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Joann37
I’m more shocked that the NYT actually printed a letter from Dobson!

You shouldn't be. You should check their OpEd Contributors from time to time. You'll find nationally known heavyweights from Henry Kissinger to Victor Davis Hanson.

Anyhoo, don't you think the NY Times would like to have a third party effort on the right?

9 posted on 10/03/2007 11:11:48 PM PDT by neverdem (Call talk radio. We need a Constitutional Amendment for Congressional term limits. Let's Roll!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: tdewey10

Whatever.

People vote for Republicans because (or when) they stand for conservative values. Pubbies lose when they are merely “Democrat lite”. No more RINOs in the primaries, ever.

We don’t get fooled again.


10 posted on 10/03/2007 11:22:10 PM PDT by absalom01 (The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Joann37
I’m more shocked that the NYT actually printed a letter from Dobson!

Not me. The leftists are always pumping up and stirring up the strictest social conservatives in an attempt to drive centrist voters toward the 'Rat camp.

11 posted on 10/04/2007 12:14:57 AM PDT by rogue yam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: tdewey10
Dobson wants Hilary to win... I am not kidding.

If that is what he wants, he is doing exactly the right thing to bring it about.

12 posted on 10/04/2007 2:11:41 AM PDT by gridlock (C'mon people now / Smile on your Brother / Everybody get together / Try to love one anoth-kaBOOM!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

It is time for Republicans to focus on the basics.

Limited Government
National Security
Fiscal Discipline/Tax Reduction
Law and Order
Clean Government

That’s it. They should drop everything else. If James Dobson gets his knickers in a twist because the Republican nominee will not kiss his ring on Gay Marriage, that’s just too bad.

Let the religious right decide between the Leftists who are baying at the moon and the Republicans who just want clean and limited government and security. That choice should be easy.


13 posted on 10/04/2007 2:19:31 AM PDT by gridlock (C'mon people now / Smile on your Brother / Everybody get together / Try to love one anoth-kaBOOM!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Darkwolf377
Abortion is the Quiet Holocaust, happening all around us while most Americans just go about their business and say it's such a shame but it HAS to happen, as if pregnancy is some airborne virus.

If Hillary is elected she will appoint judges and justices,on all levels, that make Ruth Ginsberg seem more conservative than William Buckley.

14 posted on 10/04/2007 2:24:06 AM PDT by JohnLongIsland
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: gridlock
Let the religious right decide between the Leftists who are baying at the moon and the Republicans who just want clean and limited government and security. That choice should be easy.

Well, when you put it that way, it is.

C. None of the above.

Who here can proclaim freedom in a land which has murdered more infants in the womb than any dictator of the 20th century murdered people?

15 posted on 10/04/2007 2:26:30 AM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Smokin' Joe
C. None of the above.

For every voter who chooses thus, there will be two voters to be gained elsewhere.

But at the end of the day, it is an empty threat. It is all very easy to threaten to go Third Party a year and a month out. It is another thing altogether to stand in a voting booth, see Hillary Clinton on the ballot, and flip the lever for a guaranteed loser like Ron Paul.

16 posted on 10/04/2007 2:44:13 AM PDT by gridlock (C'mon people now / Smile on your Brother / Everybody get together / Try to love one anoth-kaBOOM!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: JohnLongIsland

Yup. She can’t be allowed to win the presidency. It will be like a George Romero movie.


17 posted on 10/04/2007 3:10:21 AM PDT by Darkwolf377 (Pro-Life atheist living in Boston)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: gridlock
No. Actually, it is pretty easy regardless. An empty threat? Nope. I'll vote my concience, thank you very much.

If you want the blood of millions more innocents on your hands, that is your choice.

When I meet my maker, at least I won't wear that stain.

18 posted on 10/04/2007 5:11:05 AM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Smokin' Joe

You must consider the consequences of your actions. If your actions help elect somebody like Hillary Clinton, why should anybody care about your motivations or how you feel about your vote?

This is iteration number 2,846,984 of this argument, of course. That is the reason I advocate scaling back the core Republican platform to something we can all agree on, and being silent on everything else.

The current Republican Party has no core values. It is a collection of people who have core values, but the core values of group A have nothing to do with those of Group B, and Group C is completely out in Right Field. This is not a recipe for long-term electoral success.


19 posted on 10/04/2007 5:26:23 AM PDT by gridlock (C'mon people now / Smile on your Brother / Everybody get together / Try to love one anoth-kaBOOM!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: gridlock

They’re right about one thing. We do not compromise during the primary process BUT if we do not prevail in getting an acceptable candidate, we still pledge to do all we can to stop any totally evil Democrat. We have far more to gain by stopping them than to surrender.


20 posted on 10/04/2007 5:31:26 AM PDT by Conservativegreatgrandma (Democrats--Al Qaeda's best friends)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-67 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson