James Dobson of Focus on the Family unfavorably compares the love and faith of gay couples to the slave trade.
Meanwhile, Dobson’s unholy culture-war allies vigilantes have recently begun burning crosses on the lawns of gay, black and interracial homes in Alabama, Florida, Michigan, North Carolina, and Tennessee.
And a Jewish family in Delaware has been forced to move because the local public school board, after refusing to pray “in God’s name” — they insisted on praying only in Jesus’ name — proceeded to allow “Christian” classmates to call the Jewish family’s kids Christ-killers. Board members and local “Christians” then made it unsafe for the family to wear yarmulkes in public. Having outshouted the ACLU by harassing the Jewish family completely out of town, the Stop The ACLU Coalition declared victory in defending so-called Christianity in “these politically correct times.”
Cross burnings (links to six articles)
FBI To Probe Cross Burning At Gay Man’s Home
TN man greeted with burning cross, anti-gay messages
Jewish family forced to move because of lawsuit over aggressive ‘Christianity’
Jewish Family Flees Delaware Town: Stop The ACLU Coalition Director “Pleased” By Outcome
Does anyone else see some culpability on Dobson’s part — a responsiblity to depict the civil rights movement and its imagery with truth and not evil, to promote respect for the safety and freedom of all people, and to worship a God of love and not fear and hatred?
Thankfully, some genuine people of faith and justice — Faith In America, Sojourners, Tikkun, Talk to Action, the Southern Poverty Law Center, People for the American Way, the American Friends Service Committee, and yes, even the American Civil Liberties Union — have their eyes open to what Dobson and his religious-rightist allies are doing to destroy freedom of religion and threaten the safety of ethnic, religious and sexual minorities.
(Image source: Faith In America. Hat tip: Perspective of Pete)
How dare you even suggest this man of god has anything to do with these things!!!!
Gee you all must want to get noticed by Focus and Dobson. Katie Couric had the temerity to ask the same question about whether Dobson et al. had anything to do with the climate of homophobia that led to Matt Shepherd’s murder. We still haven’t heard the end of it.
The short answer is of course he is giving moral and spiritual aid and comfort to the extremists. He won’t own up to it, however; it’s him what’s being oppressed by even asking the question.
Mike, I finally have to have out with it tomorrow : on empirical grounds, the claims by Christian right leaders on the alleged evils of same sex marriage have been proven to be utter bunk
That’s what the data says.
Massachusetts will remain #1 in marital fidelity – gay and straight couples included.
Meanwhile, states whose voters feel most strongly opposed to same sex marriage as a group are doing the worst in the US in terms of divorce rates.
In short – acceptance of same sex marriage is, if anything, good for “the family”.
So says the data. I’ve been studying national bureau of vital stats data for almost a year and a half now.
I have a lot more to say than that, and now is a bad time for me to take this on… well, I need to say it anyway. It’s important.
Best, BW
As an out, gay, Christian, I am no fan of Dobson, but when you attempt to connect dots where no connections exists (e.g., “Dobson unholy cultural wars allies”), you only serve to weaken your position, detract from the point you are attempting to make, and cause those with whom you differ to not take you very seriously. The role that Ex Gay Watch plays in the discussion of spirituality and sexuality is far too important than to lose credibility due to hyperbole and loose use of words.
KJ,
I think I understand your concern that I should do a better job of connecting the dots and providing more dots.
Here are a few dots:
1. Dobson associates gay couples with the slave trade.
2. Dobson and his son Ryan have explicitly called for the public to “Be intolerant.”
2. Dobson and his subordinates at FRC have publicly resisted the efforts of mainstream black churches and moderate evangelicals to refocus on relevant moral and social concerns relating to racism, poverty, public education, criminal justice, the maldistribution of tax cuts, and environmental decay — in other words, moral issues other than abortion, homosexuality, and the “activist judges” who (as as Southerners understand) are responsible for the very unpopular civil rights laws of the 1960s.
3. Dobson, Focus, FRC and Exodus are silent not only about antigay hate crimes, but also about rising anti-black and anti-Semitic hostilities. The organizations’ collective platform on hate crimes is an intentional half-truth: They condemn perceived restrictions on Christian “hate” speech. But they act as though racial and sexual violence is nonexistent except when committed by homosexual persons. Why do these groups pretend not to see reports of rising racial and religious hate-crime activity, especially since 9/11?
4. Focus has historically lacked high-ranking managers who are ethnic minorities, and in his 1997 book about Focus, the organization’s co-founder Gil Moegerle accused Dobson of both racism and sexiam in his promotion and management practices. For a variety of reasons, the perspectives and faith of conservative black and female Christians were not welcome among Focus senior management.
Those bullet items — all mentioned before at XGW at one time or another — obviously are not sufficient to create the fully connected dot drawing that you seek, but I think they do constitute individual signals that Dobson and his various subordinate entities may be callous and reckless in their disregard for the racial, religious, and sexual fears that their anti-civil-rights work may foster — or benefit from — in the geographic regions and cultural groups where Focus is most revered.
With minimal effort, the religious right could strongly discourage harassment of blacks, Jews, and gays, and teach their audiences how to be “tolerant” — but they aren’t doing that. On the contrary, they are explicitly encouraging intolerance.
If you don’t feel that XGW has already documented all of that, then perhaps we need to cover Dobson more regularly and aggressively.
In any case, KJ, I agree with you that there is not a nonstop direct connection between Dobson and the recent cross burnings. I never suggested a direct tie. But are you suggesting that there is no apparent interrelationship among Dobson, his explicit campaign against tolerance, the popularity of his organizations (and the AFA and TVC) in the very places and among the people where hate violence is on the rise, and the apparent escalation in such violence?
I welcome suggestions for material measurements that would be more persuasive than this scattered dot-drawing.
KJ, Michael actually has a legitimate point and Dobson and other grous ARE ON RECORD and on their blogs as saying EXACTLY what Mike has reiterated.
Dobson, et al, are nearly EXCLUSIVELY engaging Christians and others against gay and lesbians and their concerns for equality.
Rarely, if ever do they deal with poverty, gang recruitment and drug use and sexual exploitation of the young.
When it comes to sexuality in America, they take a Draconian approach to law and how access to information and health care should be restricted.
I think they should be ashamed, really, for how much money and time they are spending in fearmongering about gay issues, instead of the more universally pressing ones I mentioned that effect EVERYONE negatively.
FOTF and FRC and TVC, can’t make proper comparisons to anything because their aim is zeroed in on something that not everyone is or can be.
They do what’s easy, instead of what’s practical, reasonable and fair.
Mike,
Thanks for your very thoughtful response. We are not in disagreement in the least, nor am I the one needing explicit connection of the events and observations. I am far from the most important reader of XGW. I believe that would be our brothers and sisters who remain in a closet of fear and are peaking out from behind religious fortress walls to learn more.
The first time I ever heard Dobson’s theory of why someone becomes a homosexual, I was in high school in the mid-70s. Our church was showing a movie of one of Dobson’s presentations (No videos in those days!). I am one who always knew my same-gendered attraction and had to sit there as the the two dimensional Dobson (No judgment in that.) on the screen described why boys become homosexuals, which included, of course, the distant father, smothering mother. That did not describe my own experience at all; I knew differently, and here were people all around me nodding knowingly, swallowing this stuff hook, line and sinker. I wanted to scream, “It’s not true!”, but having mastered the necessary closeted skills at a young age, I pretended that I was seriously considering this information. At that time, there was nowhere for a closeted, evangelical boy to turn to learn anything different, and you took it, “like a man”, I suppose.
Now, of course, there are amazing resources such as XGW to which someone struggling to reconcile spirituality and sexuality can turn. I am a regular reader and frequently recommend the blog to others. I think that on the whole, XGW does an excellent job meeting the mission of its name and exposes the actions and words of the ex-gay “recruiters”. These words and deeds, as your review indicates, speak for themselves while the perpetrators damn themselves. I believe a “seeker” and objective observer can easily come to that conclusion, and when they’re allowed to do so, the impact is much more thought provoking and life changing.
Conversely, I think that discussions of importance of those on XGW require care so that they do not become the typical thing one sees on GLBT political blogs (“You are the devil!” “No, you’re the devil!” “No, you’re the devil!” “No, you’re Beelzebub incarnate!”). When we speak the truth carefully and in love, we avoid providing our opponents with ammunition for their brochures and bulletins (“XGW suggests that Dr. Dobson supports cross burners!”) and those that we really care about hearing our message, can hear it.
The openly gay Christian and ex-ex gay readers of XGW need no convincing regarding the consequences of the actions of Dobson, et al. We love the heat of the discussion and relieve our “muscle memory” by rhetorically whacking a pillow with a tennis racket. However, in a blog such as this, the audience is far bigger than those of us who have made it safely to the other side. How do we most effectively show what we are for and what we represent? Are we defined by what we aren’t and to what we are opposed? Or are we defined by what, who and Whose we are?
I freely admit there is a place for anger in the ex-gay discussions. I get a little happy charge every time I remember that when Jesus got mad, it was always at religious leaders who thought it was their job to place unnecessary burdens on others.
My heart aches for that middle or high school-aged boy or girl who, through no choice they made, finds themselves alone on a faith journey that heads contrary to what they’ve always been told. We all know the importance of our efforts; It’s because we care that we write; lives are literally at stake and I thank XGW for what it is doing in that struggle. In the end, it is our lives, our peace, our love that exposes the nonsense and the harm of those who would wish to dismiss us with prejudice.
And on that note I will quit before I am dismissed as the old fart fruit that I am.
“Thankfully, some genuine people of faith and justice…”
You mean liberals/progressives who believe in a welfare state, a big government and an invisible friend in the sky. As opposed to libertarian atheists like myself, who apparantly believe in injustice.
Mark,
I don’t see very many of those liberal religious groups promoting a welfare state or big government (OK, they do promote an invisible friend in the sky). Can you cite some specific examples?
I say this as a liberal-libertarian former worker for Sojourners and the Jesuit Volunteer Corps in impoverished neighborhoods of D.C. and Tennessee:
The workers for these groups are very low-paid so they can ill afford high taxes. And since they tend to live and work among the poor, they know first-hand that government bureaucracies can’t be trusted to consistently put the needs of the poor ahead of politics and special interests.
Regarding atheism…
In Stephen King’s movie/book “The Stand,” there’s a scene where the story’s atheist hero, Nick Andros, tells the story’s Christ figure, Mother Abigail, that he doesn’t believe in God. Mother Abigail simply laughs and says that isn’t important; what’s important, she said, is that God believes in Nick.
I imagine that the scene infuriated fundamentalists and atheists alike — it’s patronizing to atheists, and dripping with sort of grace that religious-rightists despise. But there is a trace of truth in it for me: I don’t know for sure whether there is an afterlife, but if there is, I’d expect to find atheists there long before any self-important Christians.
Which is a very odd way for me to say, if I’ve insulted atheists somehow, I’d like to better understand how.
Since we seem to be discussing secular vs. religious ownership of “moralilty” and “justice”, I took a moment to scroll past the quiz to this debate among Talk To Action commenters about the religious left’s recent criticisms of the secular left, and the secular left’s objections to religious left/right agendas.
I hope it is sufficient to say (short of repeating the debates occurring elsewhere) that I wouldn’t want Obama or Wallis defending our right as Americans to be agnostic or atheist if that’s what any of us chooses to be. And I wouldn’t want them to dominate any public discussion about ethics and fairness, any more than I’d want fundamentalists or atheists to dominate the discussion.
“Having outshouted the ACLU by harassing the Jewish family completely out of town, the Stop The ACLU Coalition declared victory in defending so-called Christianity in “these politically correct times.”
Hey folks, feel free to get “the rest of the story” here:
http://www.stoptheaclu.com
Important fact in regard to what was written above. The family moved as early as late 2004. The STACLU.org site posted the address in 2006, thus making it impossible for STACLU to have contributed to the family leaving town.
Right off the top: I and most of the others on STACLU.com oppose the publication of personal information of political/ideological opponents. Additionally, if what the family claims DID happen, it should be condemned WITHOUT qualification. However, the school district denies most accusations and no independent corroboration of events exists, the news reports in the DE paper having quoted directly from the complaint filed by the family. I’d prefer allow the case to go forward before jumping to judgment.
Check posts by me and by Jay at stoptheaclu.com. Much of what has been breathlessly reported on the Left side of the blogosphere deserved greater scrutiny before setting this fire. Not many people over at Kos and Patriot Boy (who invented much of what has been repeated) even bothered to click on the link Kos provided (Note: Kos mixed up the .org and .com sites, mistakenly attributing the publication of the address to .com. This is how I am aware that very few Kos-ites checked the link to see if there was more to the story). I know from looking over this site that there is a far more intelligent pool of contributors and readers, so I’m confident some readers here would be interested in a different take.
Glib,
I read through your comments twice and I still wasn’t able to understand. Maybe there was too much insider reference or maybe I just got distracted by all the name-calling.
In any case, if the address was posted after the people moved it is still pretty tacky (which I’m glad you agree), but not really a big deal and certainly not worth getting upset about.
Nonetheless, the whole story is not limited to who listed what address where and when.
It is completely reasonable that a Jewish family request that the school board prayer include them rather than exclude them. And if a pastor did refer specifically to a student IN A SCHOOL PRAYER because the student was Jewish, that is dispicable. Truly heinous and contrary to all that we hold dear in this country.
And if anyone at STACLU was critical of this family for objecting, they are shameful and you should disavow them.
If there is anyone who thinks that yelling at a kid to take off his yarmulke is not downright evil, then I want nothing to do with them. Nor should you.
I’m not a liberal and I don’t always agree with the ACLU. But surely you agree that the proper response is to protect the religous freedoms of this family. And if the Southern Baptist Convention doesn’t step up (and it appears they didn’t) and if the Republican Party doesn’t step up (and it appears that they didn’t) and if Stop the ACLU doesn’t step up (tell me, did they?), then these groups are all giving shelter to evil.
And now you’re defending those who gave shelter to evil. And being critical of those who pointed out the evil.
Please don’t do that. It puts you on the wrong side.
Glib — we’re with Timothy. Read it more than twice, and you’re not making much clear other than, it seems:
“I didn’t do it — someone else did.”
“The other STACLU did it — not this STACLU.”
“We are not the same — despite being peas in a pod.”
It is good to see you condemn — in principle — such despicable acts, but you’re really not making things clear about what relates to what in this matter. Given you’ve had more than a few opportunities I suspect that’s not going to happen. Feel free anyway.
Maybe it’s just us. And Timothy. Or you?
“Additionally, if what the family claims DID happen, it should be condemned WITHOUT qualification. However, the school district denies most accusations and no independent corroboration of events exists, the news reports in the DE paper having quoted directly from the complaint filed by the family. I’d prefer allow the case to go forward before jumping to judgment.”
TK, grantdale–
First, thanks for taking the time to read what I wrote on this matter. It sounds like you both failed to read Jay’s post on the same subject. Mine post was a reinforcement of his original comments on the matter.
Please reread the above excerpt from my earlier post here. I think that should clear up your confusion.
“It is good to see you condemn — in principle — such despicable acts”
I don’t get what you mean here gd. How else can one condemn such things? You have done no more than I have to condemn them unless you’ve flown to Delaware to confront the people accused of these horrible actions.
One thing that needs to be pointed out is that facts and truth matter. As I stated here, we don’t know all the facts in this case. The blogger who intitially blew this case up made some leaps that are not supported by the facts. I think it is a very important component of an accusation made by that blogger that the times and dates line up — he accused STACLU.org of forcing someone out of town when his inadvisable actions took place nearly two years after the family moved.
I’ll say it once more —
The school district denies most accusations and no independent corroboration of events exists, the news reports in the DE paper having quoted directly from the complaint filed by the family. I’d prefer allow the case to go forward before jumping to judgment.
Glib,
“Additionally, if what the family claims DID happen, it should be condemned WITHOUT qualification.”
It seems to me that you condemned it WITH qualifications.
As best I can tell, some of the facts are not disputed: the yelling at the Jewish boy about his yarmulke, the praying in Jesus name, the insistence by the community to keep Jesus in the schools.
You don’t address ANY of this. You focus solely on the date of the posting and try to dismiss ALL of the complaints by claiming that SOME were taken from a legal filing.
I’m beginning to suspect that you are more interested in culture war than in truth and doing what is moral and right. I hope I’m wrong.
What was the ninth commandment again? Something about not baring false witness against one’s neighbor.