Home > Political Insider > Archives > 2007 > March > 29 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USDobson throws cold water on a hot non-candidate
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family, says he prefers Newt Gingrich over Fred Thompson for president.
This is the same Thompson who, though he’s just dangled the possibility of running for the White House, scored well in straw votes at GOP conventions in Cherokee and Gwinnett County last weekend.
Here’s a snippet of what was posted Wednesday by U.S. News and World Report:
“Everyone knows he’s conservative and has come out strongly for the things that the pro-family movement stands for,” Dobson said of Thompson. “[But] I don’t think he’s a Christian; at least that’s my impression,” Dobson added, saying that such an impression would make it difficult for Thompson to connect with the Republican Party’s conservative Christian base and win the GOP nomination.
A spokesman for Dobson later said the FOF leader wasn’t calling the former Tennessee senator a heathen. Thompson is a member of the Church of Christ denomination.
“We use that word—Christian—to refer to people who are evangelical Christians,” the spokesman said.
We haven’t checked with the Vatican to see whether its experts agree with the above definition. But this could be the start of a tremendous trademark battle.
Comments
Commenting is now closed for this entry.
By E T F
March 29, 2007 10:33 AM | Link to this
I am curious what Dobson’s definition of a Christian is. From the hate he spews and encourages his minions to practice, it is certainly not from the teachings of Christ.
Maybe Dobson is using some perverted evangelical newspeak? So a translation is in order to standard English. Because (insert name here) is not a foaming at the mouth, hate spewing, hate filled throwing the name of Jesus to suit him/her own needs ……….”
To further this line. Dobson is supporting Gingrich. Twice divored, thrice married, admits to extra-marital affairs, has ethics problems. What a hypocrite JD is.
A bashing by Dobson would only encourage me to take a look at a candidate.
By ViewFromMidtown
March 29, 2007 10:45 AM | Link to this
Is this any surprise? The words and actions of Dobson, Sadie Fields and other “evangelical Christian” power-brokers have demonstrated if you don’t subscribe to their particular interpretation of Christian faith then you are unacceptable. It’s not enough to be Christian, you have to be their kind of Christian. They have also become increasingly obvious in their goals to gain, hold and wield power, particularly political power. They are not interested in preaching about Jesus, so much as scaring their flocks into electing politicians who will then kneel at their feet in gratitude.
It is not only those of other faiths who should be afraid of Dobson, et al and their annointed candidates, but thoughtful Christians who know that power corrupts and that thier God gave them intellect with which to apply reason and critical thinking rather than follow blindly those who would use the scriptures not to enlighten the world, but to browbeat and punish people who look different, love differently, or live differently than they do.
By Tony
March 29, 2007 11:02 AM | Link to this
I’d seriously like to know what his definition of “evangelical Christian” is since there are millions of Christians who are not evangelical. Are all of those other Christians going to hell? Is there some teaching of Christ I missed out on that says the only Christian are evangelicals?
By Rick
March 29, 2007 12:26 PM | Link to this
An endorsement by Dobson is a major win for the other candidates. Since when is it Dobson’s job to judge who is and is not a Christian?
By KingJohn23
March 29, 2007 7:49 PM | Link to this
Dobson is right when he says being a member of the ultra liberal Church of Christ will be hard to overcome. They’ve shown before the be baseless in their Christian teachings.
Thompson does seem good at a first glance, so I’m willing to give him a chance. I’ll look into this more.
By roadkill
March 30, 2007 9:26 AM | Link to this
I am not a Christian and, although I know many good-hearted people who are Christian, that term generally does not reflect well on people. Too many are dangerous fanatics like Dobson and Falwell. I would not vote for or against a candidate based on his or her religion, but I would vote against a wild eyed Bible thumper, or Koran thumper, for that matter.
By E T F
March 30, 2007 9:41 AM | Link to this
There are 2 churches generally called Church of Christ.
(1) United Church of Christ - A mainstream, open, loving and accepting group of Christians.
(2) Church of Christ - hatemongering, foaming at the mouth, evangelical nutbags.
I do not know which one of these Thompson is a member of, but I do know that generally, members of UNITED CoC make this distinction. Obama is listed as a member of the United Church of Christ.
Does anyone know for sure about Thompson?
By pcaer
March 30, 2007 2:52 PM | Link to this
Thompson is a member of the Church of Christ. So what? Some are more conservative than others. They are generally fairly independent.
SO what? Dobson did not even know this? He simply did not know. He admits this. Thompson doesn’t talk about his religion in public. So what? A lot people don’t. It is called politeness. There are times and places for that.
How much damage is the cause of Christ being caused by people like Dobson.
By Dufus
March 30, 2007 3:44 PM | Link to this
I can’t vote for a candidate (Thompson) who belongs to a denomination that believes musical instruments (inclusing pianos) are Satanic. They only allow acopella singing.
By Tony
March 30, 2007 3:59 PM | Link to this
Wow. So much assumption here. Since no one actually knows WHAT denomination Thompson’s in, how can you make such far fetched comments like not being able to vote for him based on what you don’t even know? Why not sit back and see for yourself what he believes and come to an educated conclusion? If people in this country would actually spend some time investigating the candidates in a logical and thorough manner based on credible sources, we’d be much better off than we are now. Too many people would rather get their “facts” from biased sources and then assume something is true.