dr. dobson: the art of war September 19, 2006Posted by Brad Richert in politics, religion.
What is the connection between family politics and geopolitics, if any? Do they share the same principles? Should they be held to the same values? This weekend I ‘stumbled’ back on to Dr. James Dobson’s “Focus on the Family” website. If you do not know who Dr. Dobson is, he is a Christian evangelist who concentrates on traditional “family values”. His favourite targets recently, of course, have been homosexuals (especially homosexual teenagers). He has a PhD from USC in Child Psychology (1967) and was an Associate Clinical Professor of Pediatrics at the USC School of Medicine and later served on the Attending Staff of Children’s Hospital of L.A. in the Division of Child Development and Medical Genetics.
I do not want to get into the whole homosexual debate because for those that are homophobic because of Biblical reasons, there really is not much you can say to convince them otherwise. However, there was several parts of the website I found fairly interesting. In the “Parenting” section of the site, there was an article called “Teaching Children to Be Peacemakers“. On another part of the site there is a section called “Military Families“. Intrigued, I took a look. Some of the articles in that section: “A New Year’s Prayer for Our Military Troops”, “War and Peace“, and “What duties do American citizens, especially those people of faith, have in wartime?”
While the article on teaching children to be peacemakers was fairly void of any real substance, the principle was there: it obviously was not meant to teach children not to go join the army. Rather, by taking a look at some of the articles in the military section, you will see that Dr. Dobson and Co. continually refer to the Bush administration as “reasonable people” and the anti-war movement as opposing true “peacemaking”. Dobson’s site also accused the anti-war movement as wanting to “protect Saddam Hussein” and then inferring the movement in Britain as hypocrites because of the last 500 years of war that Britain has started (going on to question the movement’s ability to think).
Dobson ends the spiel with saying that America is the best and last hope for not only Iraq, but the world. Gosh darn, eh! The whole world! Could you imagine what this world would be like if we all acted like Americans? (Or at least the American administration – but who voted for these guys?) Well, the planet would not survive too long for one thing, but before we killed off every plant, animal and finally ourselves, we would probably be declaring war on whatever nation we felt like (which would then lead to the extinction of our species).
Let us forget about the doomsday scenario. Let us think about what Dr. Dobson & Co. are saying. In the article, “War and Peace” by Ken Sande, he admits that war is not God’s original intention (which was to walk around naked, probably not having sex, and not eating bad fruit). Of course the shit hit the fan when the serpent conned the evil woman and now everything is berserk. Now that we have explained the Genesis story were basically at a licence to do whatever (or kill whoever) we want. Sande quotes some Scriptures that explain the corrupt nature of the world but fails to quote relevant verses about mankind’s relation to it. He talks about what is not meant to be, but he fails to explain the creation of divorce in the Old Testament. That might be pretty relevant, who knows? Think about it.
Sande continues. Apparently the Bible has been used to justify violence in the name of good such as a police officer might have to use force or an army protecting its country, nevermind the centuries of religious warfare so that the Pope could become the richest man on the planet for a thousand years. Sande goes on to quote the “Just War Doctrine”: War is just if…
- it has just cause
- is declared by a proper authority
- it is pursued with the right intention
- it has reasonable chance of success
- it has an end that is proportional to the means used
- war commences, it is necessary to make reasonable effort to protect non-combatants from harm
- war commences, to use force proportional to the desired objective
Do you think that the Bush administration has kept these criteria, even in most vague terms? Mr. Sande and Focus on the Family seems to think so. Too bad this is sort of Christian dominism is what “acclaimed” child psychologists are teaching our children. In the name of Jesus. Amen.