Facebook Fallacies....

This evening I had kind of an interesting experience...

I have become fairly active on Facebook lately...I'm using it to make new friends and reconnect with old friends. As you may or may not know, Facebook is a social networking site similar to MySpace. You connect with people, you can post photos, links and information to your site and your connections receives updates about you automatically. It's very cool, and a little bit addicting....

Anyway, a friend posted the following status to her facebook account...

--name withheld-- urges you to go to www.citizenlink.com and read Dr. James Dobson's thoughts on our two Presidential candidates. Very good information!

Immediately she received some fairly heated political commentary from some of her friends. I added a comment myself and realized that we were going to get into a fairly heated political/religious/social debate on Facebook using someone's status as the forum.

I quickly mentioned that our friend's status was hardly the place to enter such a debate, so I added the fellows as friend's and invited them to enter into the debate in a more suitable forum. I thought that we could do it here. When I invited the debate, I set a few ground rules: we must all be open to new ideas, no name calling, and we must argue based on facts, not assumed ideas (someone made a conjecture about how Dr. James Dobson probably felt, I will not argue about conjecture, only facts)

I would preface this with a statement originally made by Voltaire

"I may not agree with what you say, but I will fight to the death for your right to say it"

I would also like to quote a comedian that I heard recently who said

"I have very strong opinions, and I don't research any of them"

I am not a politically active guy. I typically don't get involved in political debate. I do enjoy mental exercise and pointing out logical fallacies. I also have have a great amount of respect for Dr. Dobson, I have not kept track with his political maneuverings, but from a personal point of view, his dedication to family has had a huge impact on my life.

So anyway, I would like to begin the debate....

My friend's endorsement of Dr. James Dobson elicited some pretty heated response from her friends. I will post them here (leaving names out) and respond to each individually...

The first response:

Commentor #1: Thank you for the link. As always, Dobson distracts with non-issues that are completely irrelevant to the problems facing this country. This further illustrates that whoever is selected as President, we can look forward to more poverty, increased militarism and needless carnage to support the wealthiest 1% in the manner to which they have become accustomed.

My Response: In the times that we live in, there are a huge number of issues that make up the total background for a Presidential election. I read some (but not all) of the newsletter article. He doesn't mention Iraq (at least not in the section I read) the financial crisis or any other of the myriad of issues that are now facing our country. I would point out that Dr. Dobson in this newsletter is focused on a specific audience, he is writing to subscribers of his 'Focus on the Family' organization. From what I read, he focused his attention on the issue that his readers would be most interested in from a family perspective. That primary issue would be the candidates stance on abortion. I don't believe that he is ignoring the other issues, he's focusing on what his audience wants to know.

As far as the statement about "supporting the wealthiest 1%", I would like to point out that based on the facts, the opposite is actually true. The latest data available (based 2006 tax returns) shows that the top 1% accounted for 22% of the income in this country, yet paid 39% of the total tax bill. We are not supporting the top 1%, they are supporting us to a certain extent.

Source: The Tax Foundation

On to the next comment:

Commentor #2: When Dobson and Focus on the Family speak, I hurl. Sorry --name withheld--, but this is guys has NUTS written all over him.

At this point I made a comment on my friend's status and said...

hmmmm....I detect some differences of opinion here...I don't know specifically the views that qualify him as being nuts. I've found his concepts on raising children and handling family issues to be dead on. Maybe you guys have a different world view? Please remember that just because you disagree with someone doesn't make them nuts...it just means you have a different opinion....

At this point Commentor #1 responds:

Point taken. I have an anti-fascist world view. James Dobson's use of his tax-exempt evangelical corporate status to pressure politicians is the essense of Fascism. I also find his pro-forced birth attitutde barbaric and more suitable to a medieval backwater than to a supposed first-world nation.

My Response: The tax-exempt status of churches and other religious organizations is always a matter of concern. If a church or other tax-exempt organization gets involved in the political process, they risk losing their tax exempt status. Please understand that I am a spiritual guy, however, I am no big fan of 'organized religion'. Corporations and other organizations have set up 'Political Action Committees' for years. These committees allow their parent organization to be politically active (which is their right) without having the donations taken directly from the parent organization's bottom line. I'm not saying that its right or wrong, but corporations have set up PAC for years. In Dr. Dobson's newsletter referenced above, he makes the following statement:

"Considering the stark differences between the two presidential candidates and the critical issues that are hanging in the balance, it’s not difficult to understand why Campaign 2008 has been such a spirited affair. I’d like to take a few moments to consider what is at stake in this year’s election, particularly for those of us who embrace a biblical worldview. Please understand that I will share these thoughts under the umbrella of Focus on the Family Action™, which has supported the preparation and distribution of this letter. Focus Action is, in turn, supported by
contributions from those who do not receive tax deductible receipts for them. Thanks so much to you who made it possible." (emphasis added)

What he is saying here is that he is making his comments through 'Focus On The Family Action' which is obviously a PAC. This allows Dr. Dobson to use his influence and reputation to make political statements without involving 'Focus On The Family' organization. I admit it is a fine line, but it is one that is walked everyday in this country.

On to the second part of this comment

"I also find his pro-forced birth attitutde barbaric and more suitable to a medieval backwater than to a supposed first-world nation."

This threw me a bit, I have never heard the term "forced birth" before. Sir, we obviously have a very different view of the birth of a child. The birth of a child is a tremendous experience. The growth and life of a child (I have two) is the meaning of my whole life. Am I to accept the idea that the birth of a child is barbaric and that the humane approach is the killing and dismemberment of that child? We will have to agree to disagree on that point.

I will concede that there are conditions under which I can see abortion as the preferred option to the birth of the child. However, the concept of using abortion as "retroactive birth control" is not a concept that I will ever endorse.

I would suggest checking out The Constitution Party. I was going to vote for McCain but he's right up there doing the same things that he's always done - OBama's the same way. They're both just crooked politicians telling us what they think we want to hear. They don't represent my views. The Consitution Party does. It's a party that stands for America's Constitution and getting back to what the U.S.A.'s forefathers stood for. They're getting my vote next month.

My Response: I've not heard of the Constitution party, like I said, I'm not very politically active. I had someone tell me years ago about the libertarian party which endorses a lot of concepts that I believe (small government, personal responsibility). If I get a chance, I'll look into the Constitution Party, sounds great. My favorite preacher (Ravi Zacharius) put it best..."I have no idea who is going to be President, I just hope its no one that we've seen so far"

At this point Commentor #2 re-enters the fray.

He actually said the world was created in 6 days. Is a rabid homophobe. Bilks people out of money(he has hundreds of millions). Add that he probably thinks God talks to him personally and you got NUTS..oh and a crook.

As crazy as it may sound, there are those of use who believe the story of creation in the first book of Genesis to be a true and factual account of our beginnings as a human race. I have spent a lot of time studying evolution and other world views. I am familiar with the ideas presented by scientists that our universe is billions of years old. I would simply point out that I believe the Bible to be God breathed and that it is true and factual despite all evidence to the contrary. I would simply refer you to the tag line on my blog which is a statement by Edith Hamilton which says...."Faith is not belief without proof, it is trust without reservation." I respect your right to believe differently, however, I and many others disagree. Please respect that also.

I don't know anything about Dr. Dobson being a rabid homophobe, so I can't speak to that.

As far as him bilking millions out of people, I can speak to that. When I was in my pre-teen years, I tended to get into some trouble. The most common punishment for me was that I had to sit and listen to some cassette tapes called "Preparing For Adolescence" written by...you guessed it....Dr. James Dobson. This was over 30 years ago. He has written many books about raising children and keeping families together. He is a successful author. When you write books and sell them...you make money. The better books you write, the more you sell, the more money you make. It's the American way. I don't know if he asks for donations or not, he may...I doubt it.

As far as him probably thinking that God speaks to him directly or any indication of him being a crook. I would simply ask that you present facts, not conjecture.

Commentor #2: When the two mainstream candidates are both minions of the CFR (Council On Foreign Relations), you can bet the loser will be the US taxpayer. The US has had its nuts in a vice since 1913 and can't seem to shake the criminals that control the White House, Congress and Senate, the judiciary, the State Dept., the treasury, and the police and military apparatus. This is how we ended up with privatized profit and socailized loss.

I don't know anything about the CFR, can't speak to that. It's late, I'm tired and don't feel like researching it. As far as the criminals that control everything...I remember a statement I heard one time, I don't remember the source but they said "Democracy isn't perfect, but it's the best we've got"

Well, there it is. I have invited the original commentors to post their responses here. Anyone else is welcome to as well.

Good night.