American RTL Action, the political 527 group, is exposing Focus on the Family’s Dr. James Dobson for violating his pledge in which he invoked the name of God by declaring that he is voting for John McCain…
On April 28, 1990 at the Washington D.C. Rally for Life Dr. Dobson stated, “I want to give a pledge to you on a political level… I have determined that for the rest of my life, however long God lets me live on this earth, I will never cast one vote for any man or woman who would kill one innocent baby.” (See video at ARTLaction.com.) James Dobson is violating this pledge by voting for John McCain for president, a Republican who has recently voted to authorize funding to kill some children by surgical abortion.” – Christian Newswire
Dr. James Dobson made that statement 18 years ago. Believe it or not, he is human, and humans do make mistakes. Sometimes it is more important to do what you believe to be right rather than to hold dogmatically to something that you said almost two decades ago. For Dobson, it is the choice between a lot of babies being killed, or a lot more babies being killed. For him, the logical, but hard-reached conclusion is that he should support John McCain – being the most pro-life presidential candidate, not to mention his VP candidate, Sarah Palin.
“The ARLA [American Right to Life Action] says Focus founder Dr. James Dobson violated a pledge to God to never back a candidate who supports abortion. Dobson recently said on his radio show that he would “pull the lever for John McCain” if the election were held today” – Denver Post
They responded by protesting Dobson’s statement, trespassing on Dobson’s Focus on the Family premises, and refusing to come out until escorted out by the police. Get your act together ARTL. Why are you wasting time and effort on protesting the work of those who are more closely aligned to yourselves than almost any other group in existence? Sigh…
Jill Stanek commented,
“Sigh… I have good friends and respected pro-life colleagues who are members of American Right to Life. They did such a good job establishing credibility with their Sheets of Shame huge pro-life sign at the Denver National Convention, and then they had to do this. It’s as if they can’t handle respect.” – Jill Stanek
To finish, here’s an excerpt from Rebecca Orczeck‘s article, Incrementalism Vs. Purism In The Abortion Debate,
“Purists will not consider voting for a candidate who has a history of voting for any abortion legalization (even within the context of conceding some practices in order to get others outlawed) or does not support the complete and immediate end of abortion.
Incrementalists, on the other hand, work toward getting abortion completely outlawed, using smaller steps when necessary. They will vote for a candidate that is pro-life for the majority of their voting history.
The debate is basically about choosing the lesser of two evils; do you vote for someone who believes in outlawing most of abortion, or hold out for abortion to be abolished quickly, in one step?
Personally, I believe there are great intentions on both sides of the debate. I don’t know a single incrementalist who would turn down a complete abolition of abortion. In that way I believe we would all be purists, in an ideal situation. On the other side of the opinion, the purists have it right that incrementalism is a one step forward, two steps back dance.” – Bella Online
Definitely worth reading the entire article there.