Dr. Dobson,

Having grown up in a predominantly evangelical community, I am quite familiar with who you are and what you promote. I was a regular reader and subscriber to your organization's magazines and newsletters. I don't listen to your radio show because, frankly, I don't listen to talk radio, but I did want to respond to your recent show that Jim Wallis also responded to today.

Let me preface this by saying that I typically do not agree with Mr. Wallis any moreso than I do with you. But I believe that rhetoric and public witness both must be taken into consideration as Christians. I am not a theologian, an ordained minister or a political expert, so I accept the fact that much like you, as a child psychologist, I am not qualified to commentate on American politics. Which is my concern.

First off, on your show, you misconstrued the things that Senator Obama said (transcript of Obama's speech is here). Senator Obama did not compare you to the Rev. Al Sharpton, as your site suggests. He simply asked that, "even if we did have only Christians within our borders, who's Christianity would we teach in the schools? James Dobson's, or Al Sharpton's?" Senator Obama also astutely observed:

Moreover, given the increasing diversity of America's population, the dangers of sectarianism have never been greater. Whatever we once were, we are no longer just a Christian nation; we are also a Jewish nation, a Muslim nation, a Buddhist nation, a Hindu nation, and a nation of nonbelievers.

Secondly, Dr. Dobson, I believe the misunderstanding of Senator Obama's faith and politics lies in the ignorance of the following section of his speech:

This brings me to my second point. Democracy demands that the religiously motivated translate their concerns into universal, rather than religion-specific, values. It requires that their proposals be subject to argument, and amenable to reason. I may be opposed to abortion for religious reasons, but if I seek to pass a law banning the practice, I cannot simply point to the teachings of my church or evoke God's will. I have to explain why abortion violates some principle that is accessible to people of all faiths, including those with no faith at all.

This may be difficult for those who believe in the inerrancy of the Bible, as many evangelicals do. But in a pluralistic democracy, we have no choice. Politics depends on our ability to persuade each other of common aims based on a common reality. It involves the compromise, the art of the possible. At some fundamental level, religion does not allow for compromise. It insists on the impossible. If God has spoken, then followers are expected to live up to God's edicts, regardless of the consequences. To base one's life on such uncompromising commitments may be sublime; to base our policy making on such commitments would be a dangerous thing.

I was disappointed when you questioned Senator Obama's Christianity. If there is one thing I have observed over the past several years, it's that Christians can hold the same faith but believe in the political practice of it differently. The longstanding monarchies of Europe, the theocracy of Old Testament Israel, and the democracy of the United States have all been held to be God-ordained forms of political structures. You, me, Al Sharpton and Barack Obama are all Christian men with our own personal failings who disagree on how best to live out the Christian faith in the political sphere. But publicly attacking each other will get all of us nowhere.

I wanted you to know that I will not be listening to your radio show, subscribing to your magazines or supporting your organization anymore. I believe that the rhetoric coming from your camp is divisive and damaging to the Christian witness. I would encourage you to contact Senator Obama personally and talk about your differences, but more importantly, accept the fact that you both believe in One Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God.

Sincerely,
Dean Simmer