Please Keep Your Focus on the Family

I appreciate your perspective. I was also raised on Dr. D's philosophy and I think I turned out okay. My folks would certainly say his material was helpful. Heck, I even attended Focus on the Family Institute several summers back, which gave me an amazing perspective on the Christian life. Now, what I was afraid of happening at the Institute (Dr. D's dogma being forced upon the students) did not happen. Instead, it was a clear focus on the present Kingdom of God and how we as Christians are called to live here and now.

I digress a bit. All that is to say, I'm sad when it appears Dr. D and co.'s Christianity doesn't seem to grow and take on new dimensions. I certainly am not advocating abortion with that statement. What I mean is, lately the evangelical church has come to realize what the Catholics have known for quite awhile. Things like you mentioned (poverty, the homeless, etc.) are close to God's heart as well as the unborn. The idea of family, or lack thereof, plays heavily into those social ills as well. And more. So, I wish organizations like Focus on the Family and Family Research Council and others of that ilk would have a strong, vocal opinion about them.

Anyway, thanks for what you said. I thought you had some great points.

I hear ya man. In a complicated turn of events I spent a semester at the Focus on the Family Institute. And it truly is filled with some incredible people who truly have a passion for families. But it's also the center-stone in a crown of Conservative movements... possibly the most partisan place I've ever experienced.

They have an entire magazine and department devoted to politics (and mostly bashing Democrats) in Citizen magazine. It's frustrating for sure, and disappointing to say the least. I should write a book about the experience.

Thank you for your comments guys. It is good to hear from people who have spent some time within the midst of Focus on the Family.

Paul -- I want to confirm that I definitely don't read that you are advocating abortion, and hopefully that is clear in my commentary as well.

Having a strong, vocal opinion is sometimes a good thing, but only if that voice is backed up with some real action. Being on Larry King, Fox News, CNN, etc. doesn't back anything up but ratings and $$$ for TV. Conversely, Focus on the Family does some really good work and provides really good resources for use by churches and families. But when the head of such an organization, that is focused on (generally) non-political issues, is putting such an emphasis on one issue in a presidential campaign, it detracts and distracts so much from what real ministry they could do.

The key, I think, in all of this is that our mission has so little to do with who is actually elected, though sometimes I wish Jesus would have told the "Great Commission" or the "sheep and the goats" parable a little more clear based on the context of American politics. ;-)

It frustrates me that the nations major Christian voices are speaking about polotics with such passion. Not to mention, the issues that are closest to are heart is the wrong issues. When Jesus spoke about the kingdom of God, in Matt. 25, he encouarged his listener to feed and clothe and help the sick, so maybe we should rethink our line in the sand issues.

I agree with Tim. I grew up listening to Dr. Dobson on the radio and am grateful for all he's done for the family. But in recent years I have stopped listening to his program because of the constant emphasis on politics. I understand that he feels he is promoting the family by supporting family-focused politicians, but he is also losing a lot of his audience by wearing us out with political talk. He is an honorable man who has lived a life of integrity. I hope that he continues to be respected as a psychologist, but it's concerning that the message has been so focused on politics in recent years.

Tim--It was definitely clear in your piece you weren't somehow pro-abortion.

I can't help but wonder when we embrace other values as we embrace "traditional family values". That term itself is just a political term now anyway...sometimes disguised as a Christian term. What I mean is, when do we broaden our view of the Kingdom of God to more whole-heartedly embrace some of the stuff Kevin was saying? (Clothing the naked, feeding the poor, etc.) When do we add those things in with "traditional family values."

If I can paraphrase Dr. D's message about abortion, and correct me if I'm wrong...I think he would say the reason we need to be pro-life is that God would want Christians to be a voice for the voiceless. To stand up and champion a cause for those who can't do it themselves, in other words. I believe this is the exact same idea when it comes to clothing the naked, feeding the hungry, etc. Look, there are so many disenfranchised people around, people continually duped, taken advantage of, victimized, etc. Homeless people. People in "bad neighborhoods" etc. We are supposed to be as passionate about being a voice for the voiceless in those cases, I believe.

Now, I think most everybody reading this would agree with that statement. I just feel like only now is the evangelical church embracing those causes, which is good, with the possible exception of stalwarts like Dr. Dobson and that bunch.

Paul, you make a great point when you said: If I can paraphrase Dr. D's message about abortion, and correct me if I'm wrong...I think he would say the reason we need to be pro-life is that God would want Christians to be a voice for the voiceless. To stand up and champion a cause for those who can't do it themselves, in other words.

Unfortunately, what separates this issue from all the other missional values Jesus called us to act like clothing the naked, visiting the imprisoned, feeding the hungry, etc, is that the rhetoric is less about speaking for the unborn and more judgment against the people who are for, had, or perform abortions. And it is this vocal judgment that gets heard, specifically attacking political candidates, rather than a concern and love for the voiceless. That is where Dobson, Family Research Council, et al are losing my support and ear, and I suspect many, many others.

The other element is the underlying theme that Kimberly commented on: wearing us out with political talk. It's as if their and our ministries/missions depend on a pro-life president. Maybe I'm overreacting, but this dependence frightens me because I would hope they would have confidence in God working through them in ministry would supersede any earthly ruler.

This is great conversation - keep it coming!

I agree. It seems to me like the pro-life issue becomes a power-getting issue for our friends at Focus and elsewhere. Maybe I'm really wrong. For any group to begin lobbying for a cause in Washington...I just think the better you get at doing that, the closer and closer in you become with the Washington insiders, the more and more you want to be further in. So, I feel like pro-life becomes less about defending the unborn because organizations that champion that cause in Washington increasingly have their identities and leverage wrapped up in that issue. It's an issue used by some groups to survive upon and, then, expand to become even greater influencers and power-brokers themselves.

I thought it was a good article. I can see the point about the whole political side of things. It can be a real turn-off for a lot of people.
It's been said by some that the church is the "conscience" of the state. And I'm wondering how it can be the "conscience" if it is never being heard.
True, guys like Dobson, may seem more concerned about politics than family when they make these statements. But look at what they are really saying. They are saying that the importance of a baby, a human being in created by God in his own image, the dignity of each person, is worth fighting for. man is something special, not just a random, chance thing, thrown together by pure luck. Abortion has devalued not only unborn children, but born children, everyone really.
and even though you may think Dobson and the others are right, wrong, or just of no importance, they are in some way trying to be that "conscience". even if it means voicing a political opinion.
I'd suggest that anyone who thinks Christians should totally stay out of politics should read Alexander Solzenheitten's "Gulag Archipelago" and then make up their mind.
I'm not a fan at all of the "Moral Majority" or the "religious right" as people call it. But God calls us to be His Kids, even if it means standing up for the "voiceless", as someone put it. To stand up for Truth, about who God is, and who man is in relation to God and each other.
We don't need Christian political organizations to do that. We all just need boldness and humility.

Correct me if I am wrong but werent the people in Jesus time who were actively pursuing political change or collaboration with the Romans the Pharisees? How does this pursuit of political power make the Christian right any different?

What happens if they get control, whose brand of Christianity do we get?

Perhaps if the church in America really embraced the idea of being Jesus' hands and feet we wouldnt need political power.

I agree with some points made above, and also feel that elections ideally should be about more than one issue. However, I'm starting to have problems with all of the critiques of evangelical Christians, both by Christians themselves, and by the mainstream media.

How are Dr. Dobson and others like him any different than other mainstream groups? His issue happens to be abortion, but plenty of other people and organizations vote based on one issue. How is he different than people who say - I want a woman in the White House no matter what, or give me the candidate who will pull us out of Iraq ASAP, or the NEA or UAW endorsing a candidate? Does anyone say - the NEA should stick to what they do best - teaching? They shouldn't be involved in politics, because politics and teaching are two separate issues, and that if they stuck to teaching, perhaps they wouldn't need politics to accomplish their purpose?

I think that as long as Focus on the Family is still having a positive impact on families, and Dr. Dobson is passionate about an issue, why not let him use his expertise and name to try to influence change for a cause he believes in? Just the same as I give the people in the NEA or UAW or anti-war or flat tax causes room to make their case and stand up for their beliefs in the political process. Because they have a belief system that influences their vote just like Dr. Dobson and others.

KS,

Your question was:

"How are Dr. Dobson and others like him any different than other mainstream groups?"

James Dobson is different from all those other mainstream groups in that he is a professed Christian, and his political stances are based on those beliefs. We don't hold the NEA to the same standard because the NEA is not a Christian organization.

KS,

I think that Jordan did a good job answering your question, but I wanted to address your comparison example a little further.

Maybe it was too subtle of a point, but in my commentary I am stating that groups like Focus on the Family should focus on their strengths which is creating resources for families despite who is actually nominated or elected to President of the United States.

The same can be said to the NEA; they should focus on providing the best education possible to our public schools despite who is currently or elected President. If they are really an organization aimed at "great public schools for every child," as is their slogan on their website, they should focus as much as their resources on their actions within public schools, not just spending vast amounts of money in political campaigning.

But there are two glaring differences in these organizations. First, as Jordan eluded to, Dobson and Focus on the Family are rooted in the Kingdom of God, and the NEA is rooted in the kingdom of the US. Second, the ministries of Focus on the Family are and can continue to run completely independent of the federal government where obviously public schools do not and probably cannot.

I appreciate your comments, and I hope that my reply indicates that too. It certainly adds an interesting twist to the conversation, and I think it is good element you have added to the discussion.

Thanks Jordan and Tim for your comments.

Tim, I wholeheartedly agree that FOF should continue to help families despite the disposition of the person in office. I also agree that they are primarily based in the kingdom of God, not the kingdom of the US. I guess the point I'm trying to say is that I get frustrated because it seems like Christian groups get most of the heat for voting according to their beliefs when other groups also vote based on beliefs that are just as strong (albeit non-religious). Ok, the NEA might not be able to function independently of the government. So pick the UAW or another non-governmental union.

I also don't quite agree with the argument some people make that FOF and others are part of the kingdom of heaven and thus shouldn't try to influence politics or the political process. (I'm not quite sure if that's exactly your argument or not....)
Anyhow, throughout history Christians/religious/moral people have used their faith to influence politics for good. Standing up to Hitler, William Wilberforce ending British slavery though it wasn't poiltically expedient, etc... The apostle Paul even used his Roman citizenship on occasion to gain access to higher ups and speak his message.

I guess what I'm saying is that Christians can use their faith to influence politics and society for good, in a variety of areas mentioned above (i.e. social justice issues, poverty, stewardship of the earth, etc...) Perhaps it should be done more at a local and grassroots level instead of the national level, but I don't really want to open the big vs small government can of worms :)

I have found this discussion very interesting, given that I am a card carrying member of NEA and also a child of the Kingdom. Over the past few years my long held respect for Dr. Dobson and Co has diminished considerably. I think the last straw for me was receiving a mailing from the "Family" that included a questionnaire about public education. The survey was so incredibly biased (anti-gay), I sent it back with my angry red comments. I have grown weary of sitting in church, reading the "Family" inserts that have occasionally included stories related to public education. Of course, the message is always the same: public schools are bad for your kids. I have wanted to stand up in church and announce, "No way!!! Not where I teach!" I think Dobson effectively uses the media (his own and the world's) to get his message out there. However, his message may not be accurate and may not reflect the beliefs of many believers. But, it generates interest and, for those who tend to read things rather indiscriminately, creates more support for his position. On the other hand, regarding the abortion issue. It's hard for me to disagree with Dobson's willingness to "go public" and perhaps cause some of us to question our own silence. I just think there's more to Dobson's agenda than abortion, ,but interestingly, he's not talking about that "other stuff".

would anyone disagree that a guy like William Wilberforce, who even as a Christian used his political voice and power to help stop the slave trade, would anyone disagree if I said that was a good thing? or how about a guy like Abe Lincoln. would anyone disagree that his courage in keeping the U.S. together and also freeing all the slaves in the U.S., and fighting a war for that, would anyone say that was a bad thing?
from what I have read, most of the church in Germany just kind of rolled over for Hitler, without giving any opposition, any rebuke, any outcry, and look at what happened, an insane man murdering millions of people and starting a world war.
I'm not saying that getting power is key to the kingdom of God. I'm not saying that political power is even a goal of the church. i'm just saying that it is crazy to think that Christians can not be involved in government and stand up for what they believe is morally right and and fight against injustice.

I liked this article about the Focus on the Family. You have mentioned how much money political candidates spend on campaigning...I wonder as well if Focus on the Family spent more time ministering to the local community rather than the political community how much affect that would have on the Kingdom of God. I am reminded that Jesus spent more time working with the common folk then the political folk!! However reads this might be interested in the book by Gregory Boyd called "Myth of a Christian Nation." It might mess with some of your tehology, but he focuses on the Kingdom of this World and the Kingdom of God and which is more beneficial for us to focus on. Didn't Christ say to seek the Kingdom, not the things of the world? Maybe Dobson needs pray about that one.

Doctor Dobson has lived an exemplary life of service. His teachings have helped many. You, nor I, will agree with everything any person says, but I believe he has as much right as you or I to stand strongly on this or any other position.

Dobson's heart tells him that God is crying over the children we kill for convenience and he is trying to stand in the gap and let their voices be heard. Can we really fault him for this?

As many above had stated, there are other social issues needing attention. Fine. Attend to them, but don't bash someone else who is attending to another one. Instead support and appreciate him.

I am left a little unsettled by the writer's apathetic view point of towards politics. I beieve that there must be a clear division between church and state, but I also believe that if we don't have morally convicted Christian politicians our nation will succumb to the morality and leadership that gave permission for legalized, state sanction abortion in the first place. It is extremely easy for Americans to say that the Church has no place in politics, because we have so many freedoms to worship without government infringement. But consider what happens when the Church is not AT ALL represented in politics. The church must serve as the moral direction of our nation, because when it doesn't who do we really have to give us moral guidance? The same politicians, doctors, philosophers, etc. that faught for legalized abortion in the first place.

I am right now in the former Soviet Satelitte nation of Latvia. Ask a Latvian Christian whether or not he thinks that Christians should be present and their ideals represented in politics. Or how about asking one of my many Christian Iranian refugee friends who illegally fled their country because they didn't want to be killed in their sleep like their mothers and brothers who are Christians. Or tell that to the Chinese Christians who are in jail for exercising their faith.

And I am curious as to why there is a strain of people who like to attact the Evangelical Right like it was the Third Reich. Here we have a group who is at least attempting to give some political backing to Christian ideals, and all that people want to do is criticize them?! Give me a break. I know a ton of Right Wing Evangelicals who feed the hungry, clothe the poor and try to live a Christ centered life, but what you are expecting from them is for them to actually to BE Christ. People will ALWAYS dissapoint you and fall short, so don't put so much faith in ANY sort of government or earthly organization. That includes the Church as well. It's made of people, so it will never BE perfect or perfectly BE Christ. Christians will always fail in their own efforts, but Christ will give them strength.

So let's stop fooling ourselves into believing that by somehow removing Christian presence from politics, we will be able to focus our efforts on the Kingdom of Heaven. If you aren't ALREADY focusing on the Kingdom of Heaven then you should check yourself. Give Doctor Dobson a break because he is trying to give the Kingdom on Earth the moral direction of the Kingdom in Heaven.

If God didn't care about the Kingdom on Earth he wouldn't have sent Jesus down to die for it.

I'm glad to see some other opinions here. Thank you for commenting. For the sake of discussion, I have some other comments.

To start off with, I'm fairly certain that I wasn't bashing on Dr. Dobson, but in fact I complimented his ministry gifts right off the bat. I agree with John's first two sentences: he has lived a lift of exemplary service and helped many - myself included. But I just don't see the results of the meeting he was reporting in his op-ed piece as a way to stand in the gap for unborn children. He already has the resources and gifts to do that, he and the others in that meeting don't need to waste their time voting on what other third (read: irrelevant) party they'll vote for if they don't see a candidate who agrees with them on one issue. And as I wrote in the piece, one issue specifically in which the POTUS has almost zero influence over. Dobson already has the influence to stand up for the unborn and he uses it quite well through Focus. I'm simply stating he should remain focused in that way.

As for the role of the Church in politics, which church do you have in mind? Within this country of ours, there are 635 denominations, according to the World Christian Database. As individual followers of Jesus, we should absolutely be involved in the government. Frankly, I think our government is based far less "of the people" than is claimed. And even more frankly, I see the human organizations of American churches just as fractured and divided as we see in our politic climate. I think the only way to serve in leading a moral direction for the country is by serving silently, allowing our actions for this world speak volumes of our love for the people of our country and the world.

I purposely left my major political opinions and leanings out of the piece for the pure point that I wanted to make that Dobson, et al, should keep their focus and resource out of the politic campaigning and invested rather where Jesus tells us to store our treasures. I'm still hesitant to put those opinions in words, but I will try if prompted. Or you can post on my blog and we can have discussion over email. :-)

I think that the issue of Mr. Dobson propossing that a third party be formed in opposition to abortion is crucial and important step in the fight against legalized abortion. I strongly believe that Christians have largely become complacent to the issue of abortions because they are discouraged at the lack of progress made in the area. For Mr. Dobson to step out and say that Focus on the Family is willing to denounce (or whatever we should be calling it) both major parties because of their inaction on abortion is a very crucial and noble thing. It says that Pro-Life Christians (which ever ones you think I should be talking about and including) are fed up with the Republican and Democractic partys' inaction on abortion, and are willing to support a Third Party no matter how historically ineffective they are.

I am at a loss as to why we are not screaming in the streets and demanding from the government that we AT LEAST bring abortion up to a popular vote. What people like do is call Abortion something other than what it is: Murder. We call it 'A Woman's Right,' 'A Personal Choice," etc., but the simple fact is that it is non of the previous. It is only, and will only be murder. If we treate it as something that it is not and convince ourselves that it is something that it is not we are just as guilty as the slave owners of the Old South or as the genocidal maniacs of the Third Reich. I am not AT ALL accusing you of supporting abortion, but I think that not being politically and socially active on this is essentially saying that we as Christians (Christians are who I meant as the church) don't feel that murder is enough of an issue for us to get off of our butts to do something about.

I truly respect your statement about Christians needing to be humble in their approach to political action: ''I think the only way to serve in leading a moral direction for the country is by serving silently, allowing our actions for this world speak volumes of our love for the people of our country and the world.''
Christians must always be loving and humble in everyway, however, as the bible says, ''there is a time for everything under the sun.'' I think with abortion NOW IS THE TIME to take action and be heard. Jesus WAS NOT SILENT when he drove the Pharisees out of the temple with bullwhips and Martin Luther was not silent when he stood up to the ENTIRE Catholic Church and intiated the reform for what is modern day Protestant Christianity. Nor was Martin Luther King silent in the civil rights movement. Each one of the aforementioned leaders were effective not because they were passive, but because they exhibited Christlike humiliy in their action. Actually if you look at the social climate in which Christ lived he was actually quite a revolutionary and really a major annoyance to many people. He hung out with whores, murders, tax collectors, liars, theives and he always told weird stories about how his followers would have to leave their family and home and come with him and drink his blood and eat his flesh. The problem most Christians have is that they think Jesus was some wampy-pampy Mother Teresa manwimp. Actually Jesus was the original revolutionary/hippie/instigator/women's right activist. So if we are to live Christ like lives we have to balance our love and humility with a truth and a willingness to instigate and initiate change. This is what Christ did.

Problems are solved through much prayer and reflection, but the prayer and reflection part has been going on since Roe vs. Wade and still is. I know I am praying for a change. Now, with the prayer battle fought it is time to bring the battle to the government.

I would also like to appologize for the tone of my previous post. These blogs are bad in the way that you can't see the face of the person with whom you are in dialogue. I sometimes get a little to worked up in conversation, so when I write it can sometimes be too harsh and direct. Really though, I understand the place that you are coming from in saying that the Pro Life stance needs to be a social issue, but because of Roe vs. Wade it has now gone past the point of simply being a social issue. The Supreme Court made it a political issue, so as Christians we have no other choice than to take action. If the Supreme Court gives itself the power to make moral decisions for the nation then there will never be an end to the extent of their power.

I think that is what is really behind your belief that America isn't really all that ''by the people, for the people'' is a frustration with the issue of abortion. YOU ARE RIGHT. We had absolutely no say when ''our'' government gave the ok for baby murdering, and I personally feel furious and cheated. Now it is the time to stand up and say that this is "our" nation and that the government works for us and not vice versa. That's the basic principle of Representative Democracy, but on abortion Democracy failed.

As my grandpa (Evangelical RightWinger so let the attacts begin!:) always says, ''If you give the government a foot in the door they'll want the dog, the toaster, then your kids and wife.'' That sounds pretty bogus and old fashioned but it is very practical, and seems to be hauntingly true.

I realized that this was a very impassioned bost, so bring it on!:) Joking, but seriously I'm curious as to what reaction my thought will have. It's kind of fun.