The American Spectator

The Spectacle Blog

Shawn,

I thought I might put you off disputing the religious reason question and I apologize for any offense given. Nevertheless, it is a red herring.

In working toward refutation of my argument, you note that Dobson said God wanted him to intervene on Toomey's behalf. That's not the same thing as supporting a specific policy position by adverting to scripture or personal revelation from the Almighty. It's one thing if Dobson says, God wants me to oppose abortion. It's another if Dobson says, "God doesn't want you to allow legalized abortion" and leaves it at that. The latter instance would be what I think you were talking about earlier when you said he failed to offer public reasons in favor of restricting abortion.

I just checked a Focus policy brief on abortion. What's interesting is that they give a nice paragraph on biological development of the fetus in support of restricting abortion. They follow that with the statement that "for those who wish to consider a faith perspective" the Bible affirms the sanctity of preborn human life. This is not an exclusive or even dominant reliance on religious reason.

So, I do insist that your assertion Dobson relies only or primarily on religious reason is a canard. At no point do I think that you are wrong in saying Dobson does invoke his faith and on a regular basis. It is clearly his motivation for doing what he does, but he simply does not insist that it should be your motivation for agreeing with him. He and his organization offer arguments based on mere reason with great consistency.

And believe me, I'm not picking a fight. I have always enjoyed your work and am extremely happy to have someone out there reporting rather than simply issuing thoughts from the armchair. I just think that the left has so often repeated this silly assertion about people like Dobson offering nothing more than religious reason in support of their positions that it has polluted the media air.

topics:
Abortion