James McPherson's Media & Politics Blog

Observations of a patriotic progressive historian, media critic & former journalist

  • By the author of The Conservative Resurgence and the Press: The Media’s Role in the Rise of the Right and of Journalism at the End of the American Century, 1965-Present. A former journalist with a Ph.D. in journalism, history and political science, McPherson is a past president of the American Journalism Historians Association and a board member for the Northwest Alliance for Responsible Media.

  • Archives

  • June 2008
    S M T W T F S
  • Categories

  • Subscribe

Interpreting the relevance of the Religious Right

Posted by James McPherson on June 25, 2008

Focus on the Family founder James Dobson this week accused Barack Obama of willfully distorting the Bible and of having a “fruitcake interpretation” of the U.S. Constitution. It became the day’s lead political story for several media organizations. My question–a question I ask myself regularly when I see media coverage choices–why?

Of course I can’t imagine why a supposed audience of 220 million daily worldwide radio listeners pay any attention to Dobson (apparently prompting Christianity Today to call him “the most influential evangelical leader in America”), but they do.  Many, it seems, hope he can tell them how to raise their kids. Dobson has a Ph.D. in child development and became famous primarily because of his books and “pro-family” organization. Like most television evangelists, he is at least as good at promoting himself as promoting the Lord. Dobson’s first bestseller was Dare to Discipline, and he became popular largely because he was more pro-discipline than most other family experts of the 1970s. He favors corporal punishment, but only when administered by parents who don’t want to do it but know they must for the greater good. Consider him the neocon of child development.

Dobson has no apparent education or experience in policy making, but because he is perceived to have political influence–mostly because of his political action committee, the Family Research Council–politicians and the media also care what he says. Obama quickly responded, as did his national director of religious affairs (I wonder if Ronald Reagan felt compelled to have one of those), saying Obama was “committed to reaching out to people of faith and standing up for American families.”

Because families is the code word that shows you care, of course. All the best religious conservatives know it. As I’ve written elsewhere:

Conservative Christian organizations also devote much of their energy to attacking the “liberal media,” though for those organizations “liberal” usually refers not to a political view but to the acceptance or promotion of activities deemed antibiblical and morally repugnant such as homosexuality, premarital sex, pornography, drug use, abortion, or violence. Those groups focus mainly on entertainment but sometimes include the news media (which, as discussed, have focused increasingly on entertainment themselves). Much of the focus for Christian groups centers on “protecting the traditional family,” despite the fact that, as one religion professor points out, “this ‘remembered family’ is a fairly recent development, one that came about with the industrialization and concomitant urbanization of America. . . . Previously, women and men had been much more co-workers in the unified task of maintaining a home.” Examples of the profamily emphasis include James Dobson’s Focus on the Family, Reverend Sun Myung Moon’s American Family Coalition, and Donald Wildmon’s American Family Association, which calls itself “America’s largest pro-family action site.” Dobson also founded a think tank/lobbying organization called the Family Research Council, which has editorialized in favor of eliminating government funding of PBS, in part because viewers were “fed up with the liberal bias.” Morality in Media, a religious media watchdog that boasts the slogan “Promoting a Decent Society Through Law,” has accused 60 Minutes and the New York Times of promoting pornography. More recently, with the help of a one-million-dollar Templeton Foundation grant, the Media Research Council spawned the Culture and Media Institute to “focus on the media’s relentless assault on faith, traditional values and personal responsibility.”



Dobson also has expressed dissatisfaction with John McCain, saying he would not vote for him, despite McCain’s efforts to reach out to the religious conservatives that he once unfortunately called (along with religious extremists on the left) “agents of intolerance.” In that 2004 speech, though, he did compliment Dobson, who “has devoted his life to rebuilding America’s families.” (He also managed to use the word “friends” nine times; he seems to use that word more than anyone who isn’t a salesman or a Quaker.)

Apparently both Obama and McCain have expressed a willingness if not a desire to meet with Dobson, but the good doctor will only do so on his own terms, as noted in recent reports. “McCain also has not met with Dobson. A McCain campaign staffer offered Dobson a meeting with McCain recently in Denver … Dobson declined because he prefers that candidates visit the Focus on the Family campus to learn more about the organization.”

This might be the perfect time for both candidates to ignore the Religious Right and stop giving it undue influence. After all, religious conservatives are themselves split by this election. As I noted in the same book mentioned above:

In 2007 prominent social conservatives split their endorsements for a 2008 Republican presidential nominee. Pat Robertson endorsed former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who previously had supported gay rights and abortion rights. Paul Weyrich, co-founder of the Moral Majority and the Heritage Foundation, endorsed former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, who also had once supported abortion rights and whose Mormon religion was considered a cult by some conservative Christians. Bob Jones III also endorsed Romney. After dropping his own short-lived presidential bid, conservative Kansas Senator Sam Brownback endorsed fellow senator John McCain. The National Right to Life Committee endorsed former Senator and “Law and Order” television actor Fred Thompson.




Another indication that this may be a good time to start ignoring the extremists on either side of religious arguments is a just-released survey of more than 35,000 Americans. It shows that most Americans are both religious and fairly moderate in their religious views. “Most Americans have a non-dogmatic approach to faith,” the Pew Center’s Forum on Religion & Public Life reported. “A majority of those who are affiliated with a religion, for instance, do not believe their religion is the only way to salvation. And almost the same number believes that there is more than one true way to interpret the teachings of their religion.”

Of course, James Dobson would probably say most of those folks were willfully distorting the Bible with fruitcake interpretations.

(Followup notes: The Huffington Post’s Frank Schaeffer suggests that “Dr. Dobson has just handed Obama victory,” while this site offers a side-by-side comparison of what Obama actually said versus what Dobson claims he said.)

10 Responses to “Interpreting the relevance of the Religious Right”

  1. cneil said

    James Dobson is right. In that particular speech Barak Obama presented an irresponsible interpretation and a false dilemma of scripture that no Biblical theologian would reach.

    However, is James Dobson right to name call? Not at all.

  2. Winghunter said

    Oh Jimmy, how disingenuous can you possibly be??

    After the 60’s dumped the “whatever feels good to ya’, do it” era on us, the 70’s logically provided us the birth ( or rather hatching ) of the “warm and fuzzy” era.

    Therein, the quacks of psychiatry and later the NEA actually had the gall to think that they could control the human condition by demanding in their combined denial that the punishment for childrens offenses should not fit what is called for.

    In full 20/20 hindsight of all the crimes of violence and destruction children commit to others as well as themselves today, Jimmy McPherson laughably pretends to suggest to us that what certainly did work for society in teaching children morality and true civility when no lesser punishment could is somehow wrong is his denial born from despicable fear…he shouldn’t be writing books, Jimmy should be reading them.

  3. James McPherson said

    At first I thought that response might be from my mother or sister, the only two people who commonly call me “Jimmy.” But since they both know how to use apostrophes, and I can’t imagine either of them coming up with a 68-word sentence that ultimately obscures their point, I knew it had to be someone else. Besides, it’s generally only my wife (and perhaps students studying for exams) who try to read my mind.

    Of course one of the joys of blogging is getting to read the anonymous posts from folks such this one. A quick Internet search of winghunter blog responses shows an interesting collection of several hundred results, though, including http://fortyfour.wordpress.com/2008/01/22/winghunter-come-back/, http://samablog.robsama.com/?p=2995, http://www.flashpointblog.com/2008/01/19/fred-thompson-wins-madison-co-gop-straw-poll/, http://sandalstraps.blogspot.com/2008/03/mike-huckabee-on-jeremiah-wright.html, http://conservativesuperiority.com/2008/04/14/a-social-conservative-has-a-come-to-jesus-chat/ and http://forums.hannity.com/archive/index.php/t-520281.html. The last of those criticizes James Dobson, while referring to him as “Jimmy.”

    In reading just a few of those posts–assuming they all come from the same person, and not an assortment of like-thinking folks–our respondent would appear to be a male ex-law officer from Iowa (if so, thanks for your service), bitter because Fred Thompson proved to be a failure as a candidate. Winghunter also regularly links to an article (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1961546/posts) that criticizes Dobson for endorsing Mike Huckabee over Thompson. So it appears that neither of us is a fan of the good doctor, even if our reasons vary.

  4. […] he (or she, assuming we’ll someday get there) be in line with John Hagee, Jeremiah Wright, James Dobson, Pat Robertson, the “Jesus for President” folks, or some other version of […]

  5. […] Should he (or she, assuming we’ll someday get there) be in line with John Hagee, Jeremiah Wright, James Dobson, Pat Robertson, the “Jesus for President” folks, or some other version of […]

  6. […] the airwaves right away, but he is stepping down as chairman of Focus on the Family. As I’ve written previously, I don’t understand why Dobson has the following that he does, considering his lack of […]

  7. […] to it except in cases involving culture wars or Muslim or Christian religious extremists who force their way into the […]

  8. […] despite their self-pitying self-righteousness and their ability to draw media attention, neither religious conservatives nor pseudo-liberal PUMAs would have much impact on the election. I anticipated that Hillary Clinton […]

  9. Quite interesting, well I just wanted some songs and got your blog. Thanks for this one bro I just loved it. An additional comment or feedback which I would like to give is that this theme is quite boring and you need to work on it but everything else I fine.

  10. […] may matter much. As I’ve mentioned previously (demonstrating the decreasing influence of the Religious Right) it seems a bit ironic that if the Christian Right gets its way in November, for the first time […]

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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

%d bloggers like this: