New York Times Poll: Evangelicals Agree with Dr. Dobson

CitizenLink.com ^ | 10-8-2007 | Jennifer Mesko

[monomaniac]

New York Times Poll: Evangelicals Agree with Dr. Dobson

by Jennifer Mesko, associate editor

Majority only will support a presidential candidate who shares their values.

A New York Times/CBS News poll shows white, evangelical Republicans agree with Dr. James Dobson.

Nearly 60 percent of those who plan to vote in the primaries said they could not support a candidate they didn't agree with on issues such as abortion and same-sex marriage. Eighty-six percent said presidential candidates should be judged on both their political record and their personal life.

Dr. Dobson has taken a beating in the media for promising to vote only for a candidate who shares his basic values, even if that means supporting a third-party candidate.

Last week, he wrote an op-ed piece for The New York Times to clarify his position: "Speaking personally, and not for the organization I represent, 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."

Rick Scarborough, president of Vision America, a Texas-based group that has a network of 5,000 pastors willing to mobilize their churches to vote, said evangelicals are not bluffing.

“I am not going to cast a sacred vote granted to me by the blood of millions of God-fearing Americans who died on the fields of battle for freedom, for a candidate who says it’s OK to kill the unborn,” he told The Times. “I just can’t.”

WATCH DR. DOBSON ON TV
Dr. James Dobson will be a guest on Hannity & Colmes on the Fox News Channel tonight at 9 ET. The program re-airs at midnight ET. He will offer his views, as a private citizen, on the 2008 presidential election.

FOR MORE INFORMATION
Read Dr. Dobson's op-ed that ran in The New York Times last week.

[Edit35]

No matter how much you disagree with Rudy...

The issues goes WAY beyond just supporting or not supporting Rudy.

IF the GOP abandons their principals, they will never regain them.

They might as well become Democrats.

Hey, I like Rudy. Nice guy. Strong leader. Great Mayor.

But I would have a real problem looking at myself in the mirror ever again if I was 'forced' to cast a vote for him as US President.

[the808bass]

I won’t contribute to a party split by losing sight of the ultimate goal which is to keep Mrs. Bill Clinton out of the Oval Office. And I WILL NOT SLAP THE FACES of those who fought, sacrified, suffered and died to give me the opportunity to vote by throwing that vote away on a write-in or not voting at all.

I understand your position. I think it's a sad day when our goal is to keep someone elese out of the White House, rather than putting someone in. Secondly, I don't think that people who post on FreeRepublic are really the ones (for the most partt) who need to be addressed in the manner which you are speaking. We're all pretty engaged in the political process. It's those who are on the fringe of the political process and our ability or inability to motivate them that there's something worthwhile of their involvment which will determine turnout. (runon sentence, but you know what I mean)

[W-Girl]

I will take a Xanax and why don’t you put another buck in the 501(c)(3) bucket of these “preachers” who think it is their business and more important to lead the flock to the POLLS rather than to Jesus !!

[the808bass]

I will take a Xanax and why don’t you put another buck in the 501(c)(3) bucket of these “preachers” who think it is their business and more important to lead the flock to the POLLS rather than to Jesus !!

I'm not sure you'll find a quote (or even an action) which would back up your assertion in re: Dobson. As far as money, James Dobson's money comes from the sales of his books. If people wanna buy them, I guess they can. I don't buy his books. So I'll have to find a different 501(c)(3) bucket to get a preacher rich.

[dforest]

The Rooty apolgists are the “just shut up and vote crowd”. They have no problem yanking the platform out from under social conservatives.

Next they expect you to run out and vote for Rooty based on the “no principles whatsoever” platfom.

If Rooty wins, they will claim it was because of them. If he loses, it will be all the fault of those Bible thumping social conservatives. The Rooty rooters will claim “those socons musta lied to us”, and still dump them off the flotilla.

What incentive do they really have to believe this party deserves their vote?

[prairiebreeze]

Oh really?? You mean those “if my candidate (fill in the blank) isn’t nominated I’ll stay home and rest of my “principles” kind of posters??

I’ll call them out every single time for the nose-cutting baby/bath-water throwers they are.

[W-Girl]

I have no problem with you, Dobson or Rudy ....I just believe “preachers” should stay out of politics !! Religious organizations are given 501(c)(3) status and are prohibited from political activity !! Is what Dobson is doing on Hannity’s show violating his tax exempt status ?? When he sells books .....are those sales TAXED ....or does that money go into the 501(c)(3) basket too ??

I respect the work that Dobson has done on “the family” but I lose big respect for him when he enters the political arena and tells me who NOT to vote for !! If he wants to tell me how to live my life then I will listen ....if he tells me who to vote for then I will tell him to take a hike !!

Money + Power = Temptation for Corruption !!

How much political power does Dobson think he has when he thinks he can start a third party ?? Is he thinking of running as a candidate himself ?? Didn’t we already go down that road with Pat Robertson and Ralph Reed ??

Bottom line .....I wish Dobson would stay out of politics !! Yes, he has every right to talk politics but if that be the case .....maybe he should start paying TAXES on his contributions and book sales !!

[Liz]

Here's a plusperfect example of the irrational Mideast-type thinking Rooty and the Rudesters are forcing on Americans.

MODUS OPERANDI The Rooty crowd demands so/cons "just shut up and vote" while Chameleon-like Rooty takes on the coloration of every voting bloc in the political spectrum.

NOTE WELL If Rooty wins, the sap-happy Rudesters will claim they did it. If the Chameleon loses, they'll blame religious and social conservatives----bleating that “so/cons musta lied to us” and ruthlessly dump so/cons off the party flotilla.

This is not the way a full-fledged republic built on constitutional principles operates.

MY SUGGESTION The Rudesters would be more comfortable playing their irrational political games in Mideast hellholes.

Americans do not want their political system polluted with the likes of Rooty and his ilk.

[George W. Bush]

What I notice is how Rudi and Hilli are treating each other as the nominee, both trying to make themselves inevitable as the nominee of their own party.

They’re working together though probably not cooperating directly. Still, it’s clear enough that the two of them are feeding off one another. And libmedia is only too happy to play along with it.

[stephenjohnbanker]

“Americans do not want their political system polluted with the likes of Rooty and his ilk”

BUMP

[Liz]

Could also mean they have a secret deal-—would not be surprised if loser gets a WH post.

[anymouse]

Make no mistake about it, these candidates and influential political activist leaders who threaten to not support the Party’s nominee are playing political extortion to gain policy concessions or angle for a key appointment. They know very well that if they succeed in pulling away even a moderate fraction of voters from the Republican presidential candidate (and down-ballot Republican candidates that benefit from straight ticket votes), they likely will had the Democrats the win, since recently the margin of victory in many elections is within a few percent.

A true Republican or conservative would not willingly hand power over to liberal Democrats, who are guaranteed to work against our values. Political suicide is not in our nature, nor condoned in our religious teachings, nor consistent with our Constitution. Leave the futile political statements to those not fortified with a higher purpose.

[gscc]

A true Republican or conservative would not willingly hand power over to liberal Democrats, who are guaranteed to work against our values.

A true Republican or conservative would not willingly hand power over to liberals such as Giuiliai, who is guaranteed to work against our values.  Who are you trying to fool?

[Finny]

Now we're deep in abstract stuff! Oh well ...

To suggest that Christians destroy foundational beliefs to advance their cause is simply silly.

"... advance their cause..." is what they think they're doing. Good intentions all around. In the real world, the result in behavior of society at large is the opposite of their cause. The reason: because they mistake as allies individual candidates who spout their same moral dogma and would unpopularly use the force of bigger government to enforce it. The real solution is to fight for smaller government. Their real allies are those who uphold that philosophy.

People want to raise and educate their kids according to their personal beliefs. I think abortion is an abomination and I abhor its acceptance in social norms the same way I abhor the normalization of homsexuality, which is really what the Gay Marriage thing is. An awful lot of Americans aren't religious, but in their hearts, they pretty much feel the same way. If left to themselves, quite a lot would not need government to "guide" them with regard to right personal beliefs. Those who lived by flawed values would have to find recourse other than the government to mend the consequences. Charity, anyone? Big government interferes with good charity, too!

As far as I'm concerned, the Bible is proof of God because it holds the key to our survival as a species, it's that simple, and that key is behavioral. The honor, charity and harmony embodied in the Judeo-Christian ethic will win out every time people have the opportunity to live in free societies. But they have to be free.

The truth is that many, probably most, free Americans would object to a sudden big government prohibition on abortion. And a federalized legal description of "man and woman" would eventually be bastardized by "progressive" judges into any definition they pleased -- AND it would have national standing that states would be forced to recognize (classic example of boomerang unintended consequences of FMA?).

No matter the beliefs of individual politicians, bigger government will always restrict a person's freedom to engage in and socialize within a network of personal beliefs built on specific principles. Always. Personal beliefs that even loosely follow the Judeo-Christian ethic create thriving cultures that have rid the world of many evils, such as slavery and child-marriage; I don't believe that can be said of any other ethic, though I know some will argue.

But you have to include love, which requires respect for freedom -- as in SMALL GOVERNMENT -- to create a place where people who follow those good beliefs can thrive. Such a system will be killed in a government led by men with Nanny Government philosophies, no matter their "principles."

Just a roundabout way of saying -- vote for the philosophy, not the man.

[roamer_1]

Just a roundabout way of saying -- vote for the philosophy, not the man.

We are not very far apart, you and I. The difference is that I no longer trust that the Republicans are true to their philosophy. Ya know, I pulled the lever for the big "R" for most of my life. I cannot think of a single time I voted for a Democrat ever. But I am still pulling broken glass out of various and sundry crevices from the last election. I just ain't gonna go there anymore.

This is *NOT* the party of small government any longer, and it is looking like it isn't the party of the Sanctity of Life any longer either. Hell, Rudy is anti-2A as well, so I guess we aren't the party of Security and Self Defense either. How about fiscal responsibility? Nope. Immigration? How many of the candidates have let slip the words "pathway to citizenship"? Nope. Shamnesty is a done deal next go-around guarandamteed, because there ain't a Conservative anyhere near the top 4, and only the rock-ribbed Conservatives are in the way of it.

So what the hell *DO* we stand for? When you say "vote the philosophy" do you mean "Conservative Philosophy", or the crap we have now? Just exactly when do we fix the moral compass of the party then? next election? the one after that? This party cannot withstand another 4-12 years of RINO rule or it will be defunct. If not legally so, at least in spirit. It is almost there right now.

I will HAPPILY vote for anyone who can be proven to be a true conservative. Gimme that and I will pull the lever every time.

[anymouse]

You trust Hillery over Rudy? You need to reevaluate your priorities and ability to discern credible threats to your liberties. I’m not a big Rudy fan, but I’d take him over Hillery any day of the week. Heck, I’d take Ron Paul over Hillery.