Written: June 23, 1999
Recent actions by the US House of Representatives have both stunned and horrified reasonable Americans across the country. In it's "infinite wisdom," the House has decided: first, that federal, state, and local governments have the right to post the Ten Commandments in any government buildings (including schools); second, that religious memorials in schools after violence are not violations of the First Amendment (for some reason, I always thought that the Supreme Court had the power to decide such things, not Congress); and third, that anyone who tries to sue over such measures and wins will no longer receive reimbursement for legal fees (thus, poor people will simply have to accept discrimination).
The question many people are asking is just how such insane and illegal measures could possibly have even come to a vote in the House, much less be passed by wide margins? One answer might be a largely unknown legislative group called the "Values Action Team," made up of religious-right zealots and operating out of the office of Majority Whip Tom DeLay. Formed in May of 1998, the purpose appears to be to adopt the policy "suggestions" of religious-right groups like the Christian Coalition or Focus on the Family and then working to get them introduced and hopefully passed into law. Some of their efforts have included supporting the Religious Freedom Amendment and attempting to eliminate the National Endowment for the Arts.
But where did VAT come from, and why did it form? According to organizations like Christianity Net, VAT was created as a direct response to harsh criticisms from James Dobson that Republican legislators had not done enough to promote his "family values" agenda. In a 1997 speech to the semi-secret Council for National Policy, Dobson compared himself to John the Baptist and then proceeded to castigate the Republican Party for not sticking to his agenda. Other leaders of the religious right began to echo his statements, and Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention declared "No more engagement. We want a wedding ring, we want a ceremony, we want a consummation of marriage."
Unfortunately, it is the American people who are getting screwed, not the religious-right.
Head of the powerful Focus on the Family, too few people have ever heard much about either James Dobson or his organizations. Those who have, especially those who avidly follow him and his advice, are unaware that he is not at all what he seems to be. The reality of James Dobson is very little like the carefully crafted public image which he jealously guards. But what he also jealously guards is his anonymity in our legislative process. It is very unfortunate that so few people know about him, and I am convinced that understanding Dobson aids in understanding recent legislative efforts. Hopefully, this article will help some people
Psychology and Ministry
Figuring out just who Dobson is trying to be isn't as easy as it should be. He appears to sway from one professional identity to another as the needs of the moment demand - which might not be so bad if it weren't for the fact that he refuses to admit that this really is happening. We all wear different hats at different times, but Dobson wants to seem to be wearing just one professional hat, one professional identity - no matter what he is actually doing.
Throughout most of this career, he has played up an image of a family psychologist and counselor, helping people all over the country with their problems. Other times, however, he appears to be more of a Christian minister, dispensing theological advice to his listeners. Which is true?
Well, when he was once sued, he appeared in court to explain that his company was actually a "Church" and hence was beyond judicial scrutiny or civil accountability. In one broadcast in 1996, Dobson explained to listeners that the real purpose of Focus on the Family was to Focus on Jesus and that he had devoted himself to a campaign to make America "spiritually righteous." So he's really a preacher, right? Maybe not.
| Quote of the week: Religion is based, I think, primarily on fear...fear of the mysterious, fear of defeat, fear of death. Fear is the parent of cruelty, and therefore it is no wonder if cruelty and religion have gone hand in hand. Bertrand Russell (1872--1970) Why I am not a Christian, 1970 |
When the media portrays him as an evangelist, he considers this an attempt to discredit him. Why he has such a revulsion of being considered a Christian minister or evangelist when he does such a good job of imitating one is anybody's guess, but what's clear that his identity isn't clear.
Family Values
The apparent key to Dobson's ire with the Republican Party and American society in general appears to be the concept of "Family Values." He makes every effort to preach the idea that the American Congress should enforce his ideal of Family Values upon the rest of us, and some are willing to do his bidding. He certainly is consistent in the sense that on his radio program, he advocates real family values - the idea that people should slow the pace of their lives and reserve the bulk of their time and effort for their families. You can find this ideal throughout his written works, and it is a far cry from the repressive "family values" agenda which we normally see being used as an excuse to roll back every single attempt at progressive social thinking.
Unfortunately, Dobson isn't actually consistent in his own life. According to close observers, he is nothing less than a textbook workaholic. He works 6 to 7 days a week and rarely takes vacations of any sort. He really doesn't have the opportunity to spend quality time with his family - but what's worse is perhaps the fact that he doesn't think that his employees should, either. He has even suggested the termination of employees who refused to work overtime so that they could spend time with their children! It is little wonder, then, that he also supports efforts to eliminate legislation which requires fair treatment of employees and the requirement of things like family leave. After all, he doesn't regard such luxuries as having any place in an organization devoted to the promotion of the family, so why should any other company be burdened with them?
It seems clear to me that for all his talk about "family values" and how important the family is in society, he doesn't actually believe this himself. If he did, he'd be more likely to practice what he preaches. If family values do not mean valuing one's family, what on earth do they mean? We'll see about that a bit later in this article.
Don't miss the other section:
Part 2: Fear, Anger & an Agenda
Get weekly updates about what's new on the site and news from around the world:
|
|
|
|
|
by topic & by date |
|
Make your opinions be heard on the Bulletin Board or Chat Room!
|
|
