James Dobson’s death in August inspired some intensely conflicting feelings. For some, the author, psychologist, and radio host was a staunch defender of traditional family values, Christian morality, and conservative politics. For others, his radio broadcasts and books like Dare to Discipline and The Strong-Willed Child promoted a harmful and ultra-conservative form of Christianity that encouraged child abuse, patriarchy, and discrimination.
Growing up in evangelical circles during the ’80s and ’90s, Dobson was certainly no stranger to me. I have clear memories of listening to his Focus on the Family radio broadcasts while riding around in the family car. I couldn’t tell you what he ever talked about, though; as a kid, it just seemed like stuff for adults. I was much more interested in Adventures in Odyssey, a kids-oriented radio drama produced by Focus on the Family that was filled with whimsical adventures and valuable Christian life lessons. (When our kids were younger, we listened to several Adventures in Odyssey episodes while on a family trip, and I was pleasantly surprised to discover that they still held up reasonably well.)
My strongest memory of Dobson, however, comes from the late ’90s, when he and other Christian leaders excoriated Bill Clinton for having an affair with Monica Lewinsky and then lying about it to the American people.
In September 1998, Dobson sent a newsletter to his audience expressing his concerns over Clinton’s infidelity and America’s apparent acceptance of it. Amidst protestations concerning the state of America’s morality (e.g., “We are facing a profound moral crisis… because our people no longer recognize the nature of evil”), Dobson lists several authors, journalists, and political officials who dismiss Clinton’s immoral behavior as irrelevant to his ability to run the country. For example:
- Scholar Suzanne Garment is quoted in the San Diego Union-Tribune as saying “we can remember that we are electing not clergy but political leaders.”
- Former Clinton spokeswoman Max Parker argues “Whether character is a factor or not is relevant only as it relates to what the people want in terms of a President. They’re looking for someone with the character to get the economy back on track and answer the more serious questions facing this country.”
- The St. Louis Post-Dispatch believes that although Clinton has “conducted himself like a man with something to hide… he is still a better choice.”
Dobson, however, soundly rejects that sort of thinking:
As it turns out, character DOES matter. You can’t run a family, let alone a country, without it. How foolish to believe that a person who lacks honesty and moral integrity is qualified to lead a nation and the world! Nevertheless, our people continue to say that the President is doing a good job even if they don’t respect him personally. Those two positions are fundamentally incompatible. In the Book of James the question is posed, “Can both fresh water and salt water flow from the same spring” (James 3:11 NIV). The answer is no.
Jump ahead to 2016, when Dobson sat down with Christianity Today to explain why he was voting for Donald Trump, who was already infamous for his own immoral behavior, which included adultery, alleged sexual abuse, and shady business dealings.
“I’m not under any illusions that he is an outstanding moral example,” Dobson says, after admitting that Trump uses “inexcusable” and indefensible rhetoric and “obviously” possesses characteristics that Dobson would change if he could. Nevertheless, Dobson insists that “policy is what matters,” concluding that “It’s a cliché but true: We are electing a commander-in-chief, not a theologian-in-chief.”
Four years later, Dobson sent another newsletter to his audience concerning the upcoming 2020 election, which he describes in nigh-apocalyptic language:
Now we are approaching another presidential election that carries enormous implications for the stability of our democratic system of government. Indeed, Newt Gingrich said that what we are facing now might bring an end to civilization as we have known it. He may have been referring to a possible revolution. Regardless, I believe his grave concern for our nation is valid. For centuries, America has stood as a shining light for liberty and freedom in our nation and around the globe. If we abandon our founding core values, the world will suffer for it. The binary choice before us is that stark.
After noting that some of his friends will be voting based “solely on a candidate’s rhetoric, tone, style, or likeability,” Dobson quotes an anonymous statement “that gets to the heart of the issue” and best sums up his own feelings on how to vote: “This is not a junior high or high school popularity/personality contest. I’m not voting for the person — I’m voting for the platform!” Indeed, because the 2020 election is so important, with “awesome implications for future generations and the nation we love,” Dobson argues that it’s vital our vote be based on something other than “frivolous personality characteristics.”
Reading his more recent statements, one can’t help wondering what James Dobson circa 1998 would’ve thought of his future self endorsing Donald Trump with the same rationales — e.g., “We are electing a commander-in-chief, not a theologian-in-chief” — that he decried so stridently in his Clinton newsletter. As Alan Noble wrote in 2016, “the very argument that is widely used by Dobson… to justify his support of Trump is denounced as a sign of judgment on our nation by Dobson in 1998.”
Did Dobson ever experience a moment of regret for his endorsement? Did he ever realize the disconnect in supporting an adulterer like Trump after having expressed so much concern over Clinton’s adultery? Did he ever worry that his about-face might be a stumbling block to those seeking clarity and consistency from America’s Christian leaders when it came to politics? Or did he simply tamp down any misgivings or regrets because “policy is what matters”?
None of this is to make any comment or determination concerning James Dobson’s eternal fate. That’s between him and God, and in his final moments, I do hope he experienced grace and mercy — same as I would hope for anyone. But as the “old guard” of American evangelical Christianity slowly exits the stage, it’s worth interrogating what they said and believed, examining what they built, and deciding for ourselves if we want to support and maintain it for future generations… or just let it fade into history along with them.