Focus on the Family

In a video message to the “Liberty Sunday” audience, Focus on the Family founder James Dobson warned that if “homosexual activists and the liberal media” have their way, they will legalize “not only same-sex marriage, but also polygamy and perhaps group marriage and who knows what else.” Then, according to Dobson, “the family as we know it will die, and with it will go everything else that sits on that foundation.”

In the last few months, Dobson has publicly cast aside any misgivings he might have had about the Republican leadership in Washington and has marshaled his resources towards maintaining the GOP majority in Congress come November. This was his message at “Liberty Sunday”: “The point is that your children are at risk in thousands of ways, and this next election will take them either farther away or closer to the Judeo-Christian system of values,” he said, outlining a stark choice apparently meant to convey the difference between the two parties. And, as he has been recently, the “family values” leader emphasized the War on Terror as a reason to go to the polls:

I just want to emphasize how very important this election will be for many reasons. Our country in great danger from the radical Islamic fundamentalism which is telling us now that they plan to destroy the United States and Israel—and I’m convinced that they mean it. I beg you not to sit out this time of decision. You owe it to your country, to God, to your children, and to future generations to let your voices be heard.

Watch the video: Broadband or Dial-Up.

Focus on the Family President James Dobson – who declared his intention, despite disappointment in the GOP, to work in key states to ensure the survival of the Republican majority in Congress – continued his “Stand for the Family” rallies in Minnesota, “one of three states targeted by his national group to mobilize ‘values voters,’ to urge support for candidates who take a hard line against terrorism, gay marriage and abortion,” reports the Star-Tribune.

Dobson noted that the Foley scandal is affecting even him, as he struggles to fit it in to the message he brings to his rallies:

Dobson, 71, a child psychologist, said Tuesday had been "a hard day" because of fallout from the abrupt resignation on Friday of former U.S. Rep. Mark Foley, R-Fla., after the disclosure of e-mails and lurid instant messages he sent to former congressional pages.

"I've had 50 requests for interviews," Dobson said. "You can see the media salivating.

"Neither party has a cornerstone on morality," Dobson said, "but if it were Democrats, it would have a very different feel."

One observer has posted video on YouTube of Dobson’s comments on Foley.

Former Rep. Dick Armey (R-Texas), the chief author of Republicans’ 1994 “Contract with America” and current chairman of FreedomWorks, was a stalwart of the Right during his time as majority leader of the House, but recently he has expressed dissatisfaction with the current crop of right-wing leadership. Disgusted with the “demagoguery” surrounding issues like Terri Schiavo and prayer in schools, he recently commented that “[Focus on the Family head James] Dobson and his gang of thugs are real nasty bullies” and “being a Christian is no excuse for being stupid.”

Now, Armey is expressing his impatience with House Republicans over immigration. He says he’s “disappointed” with the lack of “deep thought” from Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-Wisconsin), the primary sponsor of the enforcement-only bill that passed in the House. And had harsh words for Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colorado), a leading spokesman for the modern anti-immigration movement who thrives in the political margins. From McClatchy News Service:

[T]he former House majority leader is now savaging conservatives in his own party for what he calls ''knee-jerk'' opposition -- ''emphasis on jerk'' -- to the Bush administration's efforts to create a temporary guest-worker program and overhaul the nation's immigration system. …

“This has been rallied up by a lot of people that are very visible, make a lot of noise and have never been guilty of any deep thinking,'' Armey said during an appearance on Tuesday.

Unabashedly naming names, Armey described Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., as the ``cheerleader of jerkiness in the immigration debate.''

Focus on the Family reports that – horror of horrors – gay parents are being encouraged to play an active role in their child’s school and education

Gay-activist group Family Pride has produced a pamphlet to guide homosexual parents in introducing themselves to their children's schools.

"Building Family Equality in the Classroom" suggests parents attend the first PTA meeting together and introduce themselves as a couple.

Barbara McPherson, legislative affairs coordinator for the California Family Council, told Family News in Focus such activism doesn't belong in school.

"It's a crossing of the line almost between information that helps people understand tolerance within their community versus an indoctrination," she said, "trying to get other people's children to think that same-sex partners are normal."

The pamphlet at issue has the audacity to suggest that gay parents meet the school principal, get involved in the PTA, understand the curricula, and volunteer to help out with the school’s clubs, groups or activities – which seems like something Focus on the Family would support

It's critically important today that parents be a part of public education in their community, especially if their children are attending a local public school.

This is only “critically important,” apparently, if said parents are not gay. 

If they are gay, then they had better not attend a PTA meeting or meet the principal unless they want to be accused of nefariously trying to indoctrinate other people’s children.   

In response to the complains of Gordon Klingenschmitt, the Navy chaplain and Religious Right activist who is still waiting to be a martyr, as well as the controversy over alleged religious intolerance at the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs, the Right is pushing the Senate to adopt the language from the House Defense appropriation bill that grants chaplains the “prerogative” to lead sectarian prayers in non-worship military functions. Alternative language from Sens. John Warner (R-Virginia) and Carl Levin (D-Michigan), which asks that chaplains at least be “sensitive to and respect the diversity of faiths represented,” has the Right in an uproar. As recent controversy has forced the military to more clearly define what the chaplain’s job is in serving the religious needs of soldiers, the Religious Right is more concerned about the need of the chaplain to express himself.

“This places religious ‘tolerance’ over religious freedom,” cries the Family Research Council. “It rejects religious liberty and would likely prevent a chaplain from praying 'in Jesus' name' outside of a church service,” insists Amanda Banks of Focus on the Family Action.

But the cream of the crop is Janet Folger of Faith 2 Action, who sees senators reluctant to enact a policy encouraging chaplains to eschew inclusiveness in mixed audiences as one step before the moment when they lock up all Christians. Calling on readers to contact the senators, she warns,

Of course, you have "the right to remain silent," but if you use that right much longer, those are the words you'll hear before you see the inside of a prison cell. Because if they criminalize Chaplain Klingenschmitt today, tomorrow it's you.

In an e-mail to his supporters, Rick Scarborough of Vision America announces his second rally against a Missouri stem-cell research ballot initiative, to be held in Cape Girardeau, home of commentator and Rush-brother David Limbaugh. His first rally featured Alan Keyes, who compared their effort to protect embryos with African-Americans’ struggle for civil rights. Keyes will again speak at Cape Girardeau.

Our rallies are creating quite a stir in Missouri and increasingly in the national press, as the church is coming together to say in a united voice that cloning human beings for body parts is  unacceptable.

This week we were informed that CNN is sending a crew to cover our rally in St. Louis on September 28.  And this week, we added our fifth rally to be held in Springfield, Missouri, which will be hosted by the historic Central Assembly of God Church in downtown Springfield.  We have now been requested to host two additional rallies, for a total of seven rallies across the state, as the Church is increasingly uniting in this battle for curbing the growing menace of science without God. ...

We are currently finalizing details for Dr. James Dobson and Focus on the Family to partner with us in this effort.  The entire nation will be watching Missouri this fall and Vision America is leading the way for the cause of life!

Scarborough, however, claims that he’s feeling the pinch financially. In a solicitation for donations, he specifically complains that organizations active in electoral politics and legislative advocacy are not given the same benefits as 501(c)3 non-profits, donations to which are tax deductible. “Our battles in Missouri over the human cloning issue is a fresh reminder of how the tax exemption known in the IRS code as a 501c3 status, is crippling the church and muting her historic prophetic role in America,” he writes, threatening that he is “ready to burn our 501c3 if necessary to continue preaching righteousness and applying scripture to the great national debates of our time.” The former pastor writes, “You can help me in this battle by making the largest gift you can, and by doing it without regard to tax exemption. … You will not be able to deduct it, but I am convinced that God will bless you significantly for it.”

While Vision America may have some difficulty drawing specific attention to its Missouri campaign, it seems unlikely that the group is in abject poverty. According to its IRS filing, the group amassed $2.6 million from 2000-2003—and that was before it really established itself on the national scene during the filibuster fight, the formation of the Judeo-Christian Council for Constitution Restoration, and the “Values Voters Contract with Congress,” which was effectively taken up by the Republican leadership this summer.

Scarborough also takes time to boast that his efforts in Missouri have attracted the notice of Internet blogs:

This week I discovered that Vision America was the featured organization on People for the American Way's "Right Wing Watch" website. It seems that with all the money being spent by the left, our shoe string budget counter-offensive is increasingly being viewed as a threat.

Indeed, “Right Wing Watch” is watching Scarborough’s Missouri campaign. In Texas, Scarborough pioneered the strategy of building a network of so-called “Patriot Pastors” that mobilize their congregations to work both for ballot initiatives (like bans on same-sex marriage) and, effectively, on behalf of candidates for office. A new People For the American Way report details the “Patriot Pastor” strategy in Texas, Ohio, Pennsylvania and elsewhere. With his “pastors’ briefings” and “Patriot Partners” in Missouri, Scarborough may very well be laying the groundwork for yet another “Patriot Pastors” franchise.

Some on the Right are hailing a court decision in Kansas that will allow candidates running for court seats to talk about their views and responds to questionnaires.  

Bruce Hausknecht, judicial analyst for Focus on the Family Action, said the decision in Kansas is another in a series of victories for free speech in state judicial elections from around the country.

"Judicial candidates who have desired to talk to the voters have been intimidated into silence by the fear of being branded 'unethical,' " he said. "And judicial activists don't want to talk to voters."

Hausknecht said it is only activist judges who fear accountability to voters who will not rejoice at this decision.

"Judicial activists hate being 'smoked out' by questionnaires and voting guides on their judicial philosophies," he added, "and they've hidden behind bar associations and ethics committees and used ethics canons as smokescreens to keep voters from finding out who they really are."

The suit was filed by Kansas Judicial Watch after some candidates refused to answer the organization’s questionnaire [PDF] – among the things Judicial Watch wants to know is whether candidates believe

The unborn child is biologically human and alive and that the right to life of human beings should be respected at every stage of their biological development.

When it comes to local judges who hold limited terms, it seems that the Right wants to know all it can about a candidate.  But when it comes to judges being considered for lifetime appointments, the Right seems to be a lot less concerned.    

During the hearings on John Roberts’ nomination, the Right was unified in its belief that he couldn’t and shouldn’t say anything at all

It seems as if Republican senators are more than willing to let Roberts decide for himself when, and if, he’ll answer any of the questions posed to him. Sen. Jon Kyl insisted that “not every question that a senator might think of is legitimate" and went on to declare that “it is not appropriate for a senator to demand a nominee's view on issues that are likely to come before the court.” Sen. Orrin Hatch sounded a similar theme, saying “Nominees may not be able to answer questions that seek hints, forecasts or previews about how they would rule on particular issues.”

…

Considering that just about any issue could potentially “come before the court,” it is difficult to imagine just what sort of questions Roberts could answer without violating the Republican members’ vague standard.

The Right added its own voice to the calls for silence, with Concerned Women for America demanding that "senators' unjustified demands” not be “allowed to subvert the confirmation process … Senators should restrain themselves from demanding comments from Judge Roberts on political issues or potential upcoming cases."

During his hearings, John Roberts refused to answer more than a hundred questions regarding his views on crucial issues. Perhaps he did so out of fear that his right-wing views would have been, in Hausknecht’s words, “smoked out.”