James Dobson: Flaming Liberal

The Fountain of Truth ^ | July 29, 2002 | Douglas F. Newman

[hellonewman]

James Dobson: Flaming Liberal?

July 28, 2002

---

Do not suppose that abuses are eliminated by destroying the object which is abused. Men can go wrong with wine and women. Shall we then prohibit and abolish women? -- Martin Luther

I am not morally superior to you, but it is fair to say that I don't gamble. I have been in two casinos in my life, and was not thrilled. I might drop five bucks on a football game once every other year. However, I have never seen the allure of it all. It is a vice I have, on balance, successfully avoided.

This is despite the fact that opportunities to gamble, from the internet to fantasy sports leagues to the lottery, are all around me. The whole business just does not interest me. I fall prey to other temptations, but not to those available through gambling. A favorite ploy of big government groupies is to turn a small truth into a big lie. A tiny minority of gamblers destroy their lives. While this is tragic, it hardly justifies criminalizing what is merely a recreational activity for many. Nor does it justify class-action litigation.

And yet, it is the prospect of such litigation north of the border that has one Dr. James Dobson of Focus on the Family (FOTF) salivating. In a recent column on World Net Daily, Dobson stated, "Recently, a judge approved for trial a class-action suit filed on behalf of tens of thousands of Quebec citizens harmed by that province's highly addictive video lottery terminals. The $60-billion-a-year gambling racket in this country is watching nervously, with good reason." He would not mind if such lawsuits were filed here in the States.

This business of shifting blame and filing lawsuits is nothing new. We all know about the multi-billion dollar lawsuit against the tobacco companies on behalf of cancer patients. Affluent descendants of slaves are suing for reparations to be paid largely by descendants of non-slave owners. Several cities have sued gun manufacturers on the absurd premise that guns cause crime. A New York lawyer has filed a lawsuit against several fast food chains on behalf of a man who is obese, diabetic, and has had two heart attacks because he has eaten too many fatty and high cholesterol foods. Why does someone not sue Coors or Jack Daniels because they have consumed far too many of their products and thus contracted cirrhosis of the liver? I could go on ad nauseam, but I hope I am making my point.

Conservatives, who make up about 90 percent of Dobson's constituency, like to say they believe in individual responsibility. However, they can be just as puerile as liberals when it comes to blaming others for their problems. They are always ready to blame girlie mags or MTV or a plant that may well grow wild by the reservoir that is a mile or so from my house.

Now we have Dobson blaming casino owners for the excessive gambling of a tiny number of people. Dobson states that, "The human pain and misery meted out by the gambling interests - divorce, domestic violence, child abuse, bankruptcy, crime and suicide - is merely the cost of doing business" for casino owners. Well, if we are going to initiate class action lawsuits against casino owners, let us do likewise with any group of people whom we might blame for our problems. Hmm. Let's see. We could go after the IRS, breweries and distilleries, employers who overwork employees, Ozzy Osbourne, Marilyn Manson, etc. Let's get serious.

Christians pray not be led into temptation and to be delivered from evil. (Matthew 6:13) We do not pray that temptation or evil be eradicated, much less that the state should do the eradicating. We do not pray that some slick lawyer cons 12 brainless jurors into rendering a feel-good verdict. If we pray in such a fashion, we are not praying biblically. Evil and temptation will always be with us. It is our Christian duty to exercise individual self-restraint, not to beg and plead that the state usher in utopia.

I live in Aurora, Colorado, 60 miles north of FOTF headquarters in Colorado Springs. Dobson is held in such regard along the Front Range that some folks no doubt will think I will roast in Hell for dissing Dahhc-tahh Dahhb-son. (Such is the veneration with which they speak his name.)

There is a bumper sticker I see from time to time that reads: "Focus on your own damn family". I apologize for the harsh language, but this bumper sticker makes a pungent point. The Bible teaches that good trees yield good fruit and bad trees yield bad fruit. (Matthew 7:17-20) Society at large judges us by our fruits. They hear the Religious Right crusading to eradicate vice and restore morality through politics, but they see so many Christians bearing such rotten fruit in their day-to-day lives. They already resent the Right's top-down imposition of morality, just like Christians resent the Left's top-down imposition of secularism. It doesn't help matters at all when so many Christians set such rotten personal examples. Who would want to become a Christian when the rhetoric and the substance appear so contradictory?

In all fairness, Dobson and the folks at FOTF do a lot of great things. Unlike Gary Bauer, Jerry Falwell, Ralph Reed, and other Christian spokesmen, Dobson and company are seriously dedicated to doing the real work of Christianity: educating and building strong families from the ground up. I have read some of FOTF's books and profited from them. I admire Dobson's uncompromising pro-life stand as well as his recent urging of Christian parents in California to remove their children from public schools.

I have heard it said that someone seeking the meaning of life should talk to a minister, not a politician. Too many preachers act and talk like politicians. (Dobson is not an ordained minister, but his words carry enormous weight among American Christians.) Their answer to life's imperfections is not to preach the importance of self-restraint and personal repentance and responsibility, but to cry and scream and weep and wail about how their government is not doing enough. They say they oppose political and cultural liberalism. But when the chips are down (please forgive the gambling metaphor), they carry on just like liberals lobbying for more laws and less freedom, and, in Dobson's case, applauding frivolous lawsuits.

Liberals are fond of saying that, just because government is not doing something, therefore no one must be doing it. Conservatives play this same game too frequently. Columnist Cal Thomas has stated that, "the power of a changed life is far greater than the power of the state." If Dobson spent more time doing what he is extremely good at -- ministering to individuals and families about day-to-day Christian living -- and less time engaging in feel-good quick-fix social crusades, we would make more progress toward the kind of society Dobson and others desire. Dr. Dobson, stop acting like such a flaming liberal!

---

Freely Speaking: Speeches and Essays by Doug Newman

***

[Ragtime Cowgirl]

Dr. Dobson, liberal? No. A Doctor with over 25 years of work helping us to keep and strengthen families...and that means fighting against the forces that break up families. That's what he does, thus the name of his ministry: Focus on Family. The village not only doesn't raise our children, it does little but corrupt.

[PackerBoy]

I have often thought that prominent "conservatives" have taken "liberal" approaches to solving societal problems. (Let's pass a law that ... or let's hold so-and-so financially responsible for ...)

Witness prayer in school legislation, anti-flag burning laws, gun laws and more gun laws, and the like.

[BibChr]

...it is the prospect of such litigation north of the border that has one Dr. James Dobson of Focus on the Family (FOTF) salivating

Written by a true ignoramus.

It's an odd thing, isn't it? On most subjects, when people are dirt-ignorant, they are reluctant to express what views they have in public. They don't really want others to see their ignorance. So they cloak the darkness of their intellect in a judicious silence.

But not when it comes to anything vaguely religious! There ignorance is something of a virtue, so long as one knows the proper cliches.

And so it is with our ignoramus here. His depiction of Dr. Dobson as "salivating" at a project he undertakes is beneath contempt. I shan't waste further time: anyone who knows anything of Dobson will be repulsed, and those tickled by the slander have problems which the supply of information alone will not remedy.

Dan
Biblical Christianity message board

[EternalVigilance]

Gambling is legalized theft...fraud.

While every normal person knows intellectually that the house always wins...the stark truth about that particular bell curve is carefully hidden behind bright lights, exciting sounds and a world of color...in other words, behind a veil of deception.

I don't think delegitimizing gambling (fraud/theft) is liberal in the least...I think it is conservative and just.

EV

[EternalVigilance]

Do not suppose that abuses are eliminated by destroying the object which is abused. Men can go wrong with wine and women. Shall we then prohibit and abolish women? -- Martin Luther

The author begins with a faulty analogy and goes downhill from there...does the guy not know the difference between a woman and a one-armed bandit?

[bejaykay]

Newman, sounds like you are a libertarian. I do not feel as you apparently do, that the state has NO role. Yet I still consider myself a conservative. The state has a role in protecting citizens. Certainly I also feel that each person has responsibility of his own. Looking at the increase of gambling in my own state of Michigan, it has been FACILITATED by government. From the LOTTO to the casinos, there is a big tax grab going on. It is not as simple as you make it. I am not totally in favor of eliminating all gambling, but government promotion of it is wrong.

[Guenevere]

....damning someone with faint praise.......very faint praise :^

....The author of this piece of negativity just doesn't ....get it!

[BibChr]

Good catch. It is like Libertarianism not to be able to tell the difference between something which, for instance, can be enjoyed without intoxication (alcoholic beverages), and something taken solely for the purpose of intoxication (drugs). The same "reasoning" cited would also oppose anti-rape laws.

Dan

[Diverdogz]

Good article. Bump for accepting personal responsibility for your own behavior instead of blaming others.

[decimon]

I am not totally in favor of eliminating all gambling, but government promotion of it is wrong.

I think that Newman would agree with that.

[hellonewman]

I agree about the Lotto. They should no more promote gambling via the Lotto than they should run liquor stores.

[hellonewman]

Gambling is not legalized theft. No one enters a casino against their will.

[hellonewman]

Oppose anti-rape laws? I don't think so.
Rape is the initiation of force and should be punished severely.
Gambling and other vices are voluntary. No one is forced to participate in them.

[Swanks]

>i> ... Unlike Gary Bauer...

I agree with him there. Mr. 'Less-the-one-percent-of-the-vote' decided his next career was head of the Christian Right in an imagined McCain administration. Of course, that required some serious back-stabbing of the current leadership. Ei tu, Brutus?

And besides, he shouldn't be keeping 25 year old girlfriends on campaign staffs at his age.

[EternalVigilance]

Gambling is not legalized theft.

I think it is...theft by deception.

They are fleecing the foolish who are clueless about how the whole thing really works...exploiting base human greed and avarice.

[Dataman]

But not when it comes to anything vaguely religious! There ignorance is something of a virtue, so long as one knows the proper cliches.

Why aren't you writing for World?

[AppyPappy]

The writer confuses conservatism with Libertarianism.

[AppyPappy]

Gambling is not legalized theft. No one enters a casino against their will.

And Gamblers Anonymous does not exist. Gambling promises a Mercedes but gives you a Pinto.

[realpatriot71]

Christians pray not be led into temptation and to be delivered from evil. (Matthew 6:13) We do not pray that temptation or evil be eradicated, much less that the state should do the eradicating. We do not pray that some slick lawyer cons 12 brainless jurors into rendering a feel-good verdict. If we pray in such a fashion, we are not praying biblically. Evil and temptation will always be with us. It is our Christian duty to exercise individual self-restraint, not to beg and plead that the state usher in utopia.

Ha!

[Moby Grape]

Well said....and doesn't it always seem to be the case here at FR, and other sites, that those who are the most ignorant use the most words to prove it.

[Diverdogz]

Any idiot who can't figure out that casino odds are stacked against him isn't going to hang on to his money very long anyway. If casinos don't get it - pawn shops, time-share salesmen, TV preachers, tobacco companies, prostitutes or any number of other scam artists will take it from them.

[realpatriot71]

Morning Ap! I hope this post finds you well :-)

When exactly are we supposed to let individuals make their own moral choices outside of some sort of stated dictated mandate? We're always going to have screw-ups. Does that now mean that responsible citizens cannot now enganage in an activity for which they find entertainment because some people cannot "keep it together"?

[AppyPappy]

That depends on whether fraud should be allowed. If you are going to sell a risky product, you should inform people of the risk. Especially if you are going to give them alcohol to facilitate the transaction.

[realpatriot71]

So, your position is that people are not informed enough by these institutions to make reasonable choices about gabling? If I'm off here, let me know.

[AppyPappy]

If you are going to sell a risky product, inform people of the risk. If you are going to sell a product or service while giving them alcohol, give them a period where they can change their decision when they sober up.

[biblewonk]

Gambling is legalized theft...fraud.

So are 30 year mortgages.

[realpatriot71]

What would you propose be done with gambling?

[BibChr]

I knew SOMEONE would miss the obvious; I just didn't know it would be you.

Force has nothing to do with it. The point is Luther is quoted as saying (in effect) that it would be silly to outloaw women because some men have some problems with them. From this it is reasoned that all overtly-morally-based laws are pointless.

That makes just as much sense as reasoning that laws against rape are pointless.

Did you follow, that time? I did type a little slower. (c;

Dan

[BibChr]

Thanks, I'd like to. In fact, I tried, a number of years ago, but the timing was bad (just switching editors, and my submissions, I think, got lost).

Dan

[AppyPappy]

1. Make the risks known to everyone just like the lottery.
2. If they are going to serve liquor, allow the gamblers to get their money back after 24 hours(a cooling off period). This is generally true of any large transaction where alcohol is served.

[BibChr]

...those who are the most ignorant use the most words to prove it

That's well-put. There does seem to be a stable of The Usual Suspects here at FR, always on the spot to vent the same cliches over and over and over again, never gaining one millimeter in their understanding, never letting go of one cherished misconception, piece of ignorance, or outright falsehood, doesn't there?

Dan

[BikerNYC]

I think it is...theft by deception.

They are fleecing the foolish who are clueless about how the whole thing really works...exploiting base human greed and avarice.

Oh, give me a break. And selling one's labor is exploitation, right? Nice liberal mantra.

When you go to a casino, you are paying for a good time: the entertainment, the shows, the food, the drinks. You are also paying for their electricity, their taxes and every other expense they incur. What you get out of it is fun and a chance, just a chance, of winning something.

Gambling is no more theft than buying a pair of jeans is theft. (Pssst...I don't want to break your bubble, but retail sales are rigged too...the house [if it's working right] always brings in more than it gives out in product.)

[realpatriot71]

You don't think that people are familiar enough with the "evils" associated with alcohol to make these kinds of decisions themselves? I think I might set a limit, such as a breathalyzer of .1-.15 (have guys at the door) that's when you begin to get pretty stupid depending on tolerance and body size.

[BikerNYC]

If they are going to serve liquor, allow the gamblers to get their money back after 24 hours(a cooling off period).

Have you ever been to an auction at Sotheby's or Christie's? They serve wine during previews and before some auctions. What do you think that does? It makes people more amenable to putting bids in for merchandise. Very effective sales tool. You think you are getting pampered and it makes you feel better about bidding on merchandise. Do you think you can go back after you bought the Matisse and claim you had a little too much to drink? Good luck.

Are all retailers supposed to now check your blood alcohol level before you buy their product?

[sonserae]

I agree with this guy. Christianity has been warped into a control thing. There was sin all around Jesus. Did he become a political figure and try and change laws to steer people towards Christianity? Nonsense. Christianity is based on the fact that when one changes one's heart toward Christ, as they become closer to Him, the desire for evil things diminishes. Never has laws changed a person's heart. Paul even mentions in the New Testament that the laws actually cause him to sin.

"When we were controlled by our old nature, sinful desires were at work within us, and the law aroused these evil desires that produced sinful deeds, resulting in death." Romans 7:5

We cannot force people to become Christians or not gamble or drink or take drugs. That is the person's responsibility. If one makes bad choices, one must suffer the consequences for those choices. Unfortunately, this world is now becoming the land of the scapegoats.

[AppyPappy]

Do you think you can go back after you bought the Matisse and claim you had a little too much to drink? Good luck.

Can or should?

[BikerNYC]

"Can" -- forgetaboutit.

"Should" -- You're a big boy...forgetaboutit. (Be careful. The coffee at McDonald's is very hot.)

[AppyPappy]

You don't think that people are familiar enough with the "evils" associated with alcohol to make these kinds of decisions themselves?

Never assume anything. People are smart enough to stay out of the way of charging bulls but they do it anyway.

The problem is not that you got drunk. The problem is when people knowingly take advantage of you while you are in that state.

[dubyagee]

If you are going to sell a product or service while giving them alcohol, give them a period where they can change their decision when they sober up.

They don't have to buy the product or service and they certainly don't have to drink the alcohol. What about the man/woman that goes to a bar, gets drunk, and proceeds to commit adultery and possible AIDS. Should they, too, be allowed to change their decision once they sober up? Oops! I forgot. Can't happen.

[AppyPappy]

An Alzheimer's patient is a big boy too. That doesn't mean you can take advantage of him. A fool and his money, right?

[sonserae]

Sorry...doesn't fly....If you become drunk and someone takes advantage of your state of drunkeness, that is your responsibility. You chose to become intoxicated and you chose to be in a state of being taken advantage of. This is no one's responsibility but your own.

[J. L. Chamberlain]

Oh, give me a break. And selling one's labor is exploitation, right? Nice liberal mantra.

Stop it! You'll shatter their self deception that they are conservatives!

J

[AppyPappy]

They can change their decision about a product or service. If you knowingly take advantage of an impaired person, you should be punished for it.

[BikerNYC]

So you think that allowing someone to come into an establishment filled with slot machines or art for auction and offering him a drink is taking advantage of him? Mind you, you are not making him put quarters in those machines or raise his paddle during the auction. When does the responsibility of the individual in this case officially end?

[AppyPappy]

If you become drunk and someone takes advantage of your state of drunkeness, that is your responsibility.

So pickpocketing drunks is allowed in your world?

[sonserae]

Hello? What world are you in???? I thought we were talking about someone spending their own money or gambling...not someone unknowingly stealing their wallet. Earth to AppyPappy...

[AppyPappy]

Do you mean the responsibility of the person taking advantage of the impaired person?

Here's an idea. Don't serve liquor and you remove 9/10's of the problem.

[AppyPappy]

What if the pickpocket contends the drunk WANTED to give him the wallet?

[dubyagee]

They can change their decision about a product or service. If you knowingly take advantage of an impaired person, you should be punished for it.

And what responsibility does the impaired person have? Are they not to be held accountable for getting impaired? If my husband blows the mortgage payment on poker losses, I'm certainly not going to blame the guys he was playing poker with, or the fact that he was "impaired."