06/24/2008
James Dobson on Obama's 'Fruitcake Interpretation' Skills
In a Focus on the Family radio show that aired this morning, James Dobson criticized Barack Obama's distortion of the meaning of the Bible, and his interpretation of the Constitution, going so far as to color it for his followers in a derogatory term usually reserved for the gays he usually targets:
"'I think he's deliberately distorting the traditional understanding of the Bible to fit his own worldview, his own confused theology,' Dobson said...Dobson reserved some of his harshest criticism for Obama's argument that the religiously motivated must frame debates over issues like abortion not just in their own religion's terms but in arguments accessible to all people. He said Obama, who supports abortion rights, is trying to govern by the 'lowest common denominator of morality,' labeling it 'a fruitcake interpretation of the Constitution.' ... 'Am I required in a democracy to conform my efforts in the political arena to his bloody notion of what is right with regard to the lives of tiny babies?' Dobson said. 'What he's trying to say here is unless everybody agrees, we have no right to fight for what we believe.'"
Watch and listen, AFTER THE JUMP...
Posted 5:21 PM EST by Andy in Barack Obama, Election 2008, JAmes Dobson, News | Permalink
Like it?
Subscribe to FREE Towleroad daily headlines with our RSS feed!
RECENT STORIES:
blah, blah, blaaaaaah...
Posted by: soulbrotha | Jun 24, 2008 5:34:14 PM
Ladies and gentlemen... here come the Log Cabinettes and other self-loathing homosexuals to:
present their various rationales as to why "fruitcake" is not a slur towards gays; and,
to scold Andy for being a naughty "word Nazi".
Posted by: John in Manhattan | Jun 24, 2008 5:48:58 PM
Fruitcake may be an anti-gay slur to some, but at least in Massachusetts, it's could be primarily defined as a vulgar way of saying "crazy." Words tend to have different meanings in different places, but at least I don't consider it a homophobic word.
All that said, it doesn't excuse Dobson one bit from saying it. If anyone's the fruitcake, Dobson is.
Posted by: Ryan | Jun 24, 2008 5:50:17 PM
John, I posted my response before I got to see what you wrote. I assure you I'm not a log cabin republican or self-loather, so please drop the 'tude.
I'm very liberal and quite fine with being gay. Fruitcake just isn't a homophobic word. It's a vulgar way of saying crazy - which, as I already said, Dobson is the only one here who could actually be guilty of being that, given the evidence of all of his absurd statements.
Posted by: Ryan | Jun 24, 2008 5:53:26 PM
Well said, Ryan. A check from Focus On My Anus is in the mail!
Posted by: John in Manhattan | Jun 24, 2008 5:53:43 PM
Quote:
Dobson and Minnery accused Obama of wrongly equating Old Testament texts and dietary codes that no longer apply to Jesus' teachings in the New Testament.
"I think he's deliberately distorting the traditional understanding of the Bible to fit his own worldview, his own confused theology," Dobson said. (/quote)
Wow, talk about irony...
Posted by: Mike | Jun 24, 2008 5:56:24 PM
James Dobson is the most dangerous man in America. What I find ridiculous about his comment was this bit, "What he's trying to say here is unless everybody agrees, we have no right to fight for what we believe." Mind you, Dobson believes that his religious beliefs should be imposed on ALL Americans. I was exposed to his rhetoric my entire childhood and I thought he was dangerous then. I know liberals say it too often, but if this guy were given the opportunity, he'd be a full on fascist.
Posted by: Jeff | Jun 24, 2008 5:58:25 PM
Poor James is getting desperate- the Religious Wrong are losing power and that smarts.
Posted by: homer | Jun 24, 2008 6:04:00 PM
Jeff, you're absolutely right. I grew up in Texas, where the demented "Focus on the Family" radio editorials were played all the time. Dobson is absolutely a disciple of intolerance and backward thinking and a practitioner of let-me-smile-while-I-oppress-you hocus-pocus. This world will be a better place when Dobson has gone on to his reward.
Posted by: Joe | Jun 24, 2008 6:09:46 PM
patience, my dears, patience... take heart that eventually these old religious fucks will go the way of the dinosaurs...
Posted by: the queenq | Jun 24, 2008 6:34:03 PM
Ryan is correct, IMHO, in regards to Dobson's use of the word "fruitcake," and that does not make either of use wingnuts.
Let's remember from what generation Dobson hails in which proper use of the term could be used in sentences such as "Dobson is a fruitcake," or "Dobson proves he's a fruitcake by suggesting that if a father showers with his son, his son will likely grow up to be a real man, and not gay at all."
There, all sorted.
Posted by: KJ | Jun 24, 2008 6:51:45 PM
My only comment is: "Whatever"...
Posted by: Mike | Jun 24, 2008 6:58:01 PM
Dobson also is airing fear mongering commercials about how a dem controlled congress under Obama will re-instate the "fairness doctrine"
I hope to hell they do bring back the "fairness doctrine" which was the law of the land from 1949 till reagan nixed it.
Equal time on the public's airwaves that are only leased by the media! put on an anti abortion, anti-gay, pro creationist bs and you have to also have a pro choicer, pro-gay, evolutionist on to present the other side.
Please please please bring it back
Anyway; the 2nd poll in a week shows Obama with a 15% lead
The first was newsweek, Now Bloomberg + LA Times is also showing a 15% lead for Obama
neo-conservatism is D.O.A.
Posted by: Jimmyboyo | Jun 24, 2008 6:58:57 PM
Since when do we need to "remember from what generation..." anybody comes from to justify hate and bigotry? When someone with such a prominent position and level of influence as James Dobson, who by the way, is permitted to espouse such "vulgar" ideas from the bully pulpit permitted him "TAX FREE" and over "PUBLIC" airwaves, their ability to hide behind their cloak of their "generation" is forfeited.
If he's going to preach on modern day issues then he has a responsibility to choose language that is relevant and permissable in this day and age.
As a side note, can anybody enlighten me on how individuals like Dobson are permitted to "preach" about "political" issues and still maintain their tax exempt status under the umbrella of religion?
Dobson said "Am I required in a democracy to conform my efforts in the political arena to his bloody notion of what is right with regard to the lives of tiny babies?" Based on his own acknowledgement that his efforts are focused on the "political arena", he sounds like a political operative and NOT a religious leader. Hell, he's not even a religious leader....he's a child psychologist being paid by presenting himself as a religious leader.
I really wonder how many of his "followers" know that he has no religious credentials at all, let alone not being a minister?
Please Jesus Save Me From Your Followers....
Posted by: jeff | Jun 24, 2008 7:05:19 PM
While "fruitcake" might mean crazy in Massachusetts, it also is a substitute for "fag" or any other "fun" homophobic slur. Dobson knows exactly what he's doing when he chooses a word like that, and he doesn't deserve to be defended.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=fruitcake
Posted by: davitydave | Jun 24, 2008 7:14:46 PM
Of course, Dobson is regarded as a closeted gay man by many, including the man who co-founded Focus on the Family with him.
Posted by: Hephaestion | Jun 24, 2008 7:23:17 PM
He's pissed because he doesn't have a fundamentalist on any ticket. And I love it.
Posted by: Tyler | Jun 24, 2008 7:31:17 PM
The word "fruitcake" really derives a lot of its meaning from context. I've used it to mean crazy by referring to someone as being as "nutty as a fruitcake". I've heard some folks use it as a gay reference, but most frequently just "fruit" suffices to mean gay. If someone told me someone was a "fruitcake" my first definition would be someone is crazy. I'm a northerner who has lived in the south, traveled to the west coast and now lives in the mid west and really don't recall the term fruitcake as meaning anything but a little touched in the head. Again, it has to do with context I think. I think Dobson's a fruitcake, but definitely not a fruit.
Posted by: Bob R | Jun 24, 2008 7:42:37 PM
I wont waste my time on listening hate speeches about anyone...waste of time...I love myself too much to allow some ASS to give me a social std.
Posted by: bosie | Jun 24, 2008 7:48:15 PM
Be careful not to polarize the gay community from the community of faith. You risk perpetuating the notion that we are all godless and morally bankrupt by virtue of being gay. It would be more responsible to take the time to post a balanced and accurate article. Reference CNN's article and you might see that Dobson's actual objection to the content of Obama's speech has some merit. Obama was obviously exploiting a literal interpretation of scripture for dramatic effect; an interpretation that NO REASONABLE Christian--however fundamentalist--would subscribe to today.
Either get your hair wet or stay in the shallow end posting articles about David Beckham's crotch.
Posted by: premium310 | Jun 24, 2008 7:51:41 PM
Dear Premium310 - your ignorance is showing you might want to zip it up.
You wrote ... "Obama was obviously exploiting a literal interpretation of scripture for dramatic effect; an interpretation that NO REASONABLE Christian--however fundamentalist--would subscribe to today."
So the ban on shelfish is out because Protestants say so ... but the ban on homosexuality is in - because they rewrote the bible dozens and dozens of times - writing in the word homosexuality - when such a concept or word did not exist when the bible was written.
You can not pick and choose what you follow in the bible - and yet demand laws are passed to follow parts of it - and be taken seriously by sane rationale people - only ignorance would allow a person to agree with Dobson and not see Mr. Obama's obviously correct point.
The bible has been re-written by MEN a thousand time over and gay hate has been put into it - so one group can demean and control another. That is not God's work - that is the Devil's works - Dobson, The Mormons, and the like - anti-christs and unchristian to the core.
I love hot the vast majority of gay hate quotes man wrote into the bible are in athe old testament - which Dobson says no longer applies. LOVE IT !!
All you have after that is a bunch of anti-sex quotes from St. Paul - re-written as bans on homosexuality. The Catholic Bible (the original Bible BTW) and the first protestant King James Bible do not have the word homosexual anywhere in them.
Protestant Bibles are just as much a fraud as The Book of Mormon. Just recent works of man ... not works of God.
Posted by: Rjp3 | Jun 24, 2008 8:06:56 PM
Dear Premium310: I rejected long ago the ridiculous and hybristic notion that Christians or anyone else has a monopoly on universal truths and the keys to happiness.
As for moral bankruptcy, it's hard for me to imagine an institution that more perfectly encapsulates that idea than people like James Dobson, the Catholic Church, or anyone else who complains about the mote in my eye while igorning the plank in his own. One doesn't need some idiotic belief in a vile, violent sky fairie like Jahweh of the Hebrews to be a good person.
As for Andy's postings re: David Beckham's underwear -- I lump that into the aesthetic urge that dominates gay men and has done so for millenia now. Art exists above our pedestrian notions of right and wrong. (Ars longa; vita brevis.) And it is the duty of the artist and aesthete to explode commonly held ideas of decency and acceptibilty.
Please feel free to deliver your petty sermon to your fellow flocking sheep. But spare me.
Posted by: GM | Jun 24, 2008 8:16:01 PM
I've no doubt that Dobson and his people are sophisticated enough to use "fruitcake" as a less than subtle code word for gay. It's common slang for crazy, but it's also common slang for gay (even if you haven't heard it), and using it is akin to "San Francisco liberal" and other gayish terms the right wing likes to toss about in hopes of scaring the less informed electorate.
People of faith in the gay community needn't engage in useless debates with irrational political propagandists posing as faith leaders. It is perfectly reasonable for liberals of faith to offer informed interpretations of scripture and thoughts on the role of religion in society while ignoring the desperate ranting of people like Dobson, whose mind is permanently set in stone. The right wing doesn't own religion.
Posted by: Ernie | Jun 24, 2008 8:17:23 PM
Did some bible study online --- look what I found out -----
Evangelical and Protestant "preachers" and "christian" PUBLISHING HOUSES - since the 1960's have been REWRITING the Bible
to include direct references to homosexuality that WERE NOT THERE in the original latin to english translations.
Fake bibles are NOT to be trusted.
Example ---
The Roman Catholic Bible (version 1600's) and the Original King James Bible (first protestant bible) both have Timothy 1:9 translated from latin as:
"Laws are for whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons."
Insisting that "them that defile themselves with mankind" means homosexuality is a huge stretch ...
... but that does not stop the Straight Supremist Christianists .... in one of their newest of many "bibles" from the 1990's the bible verse is rewritten as:
"It is for those who do sex sins and for people who do sex sins with their own sex. It is for people who steal other people and for those who lie and for those who promise not to lie, but do."
Another 90's evangelical bible has it as:
"It is for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers."
Another has it as:
"It is for adulterers and perverts, for slave traders and liars and perjurers"
This one was written 1973 - homosexuality is not mentioned here - just perverts in general.
And another:
"It was made for those who use sex in the wrong way and for men who have sex with other men. It was made for those who steal people, for those who tell lies, for those who make a promise that is not true."
Tho Homo reference was written into the bible Canadian lady who "taught" then rewrote! the bible back in 1953.
Back to the mid-1990 a new protestant bible came out that takes the homosexuality issue OUT of the verse and adds in "TWISTED SEX":
"It is for those who commit adultery. It is for those who have a twisted view of sex. It is for people who buy and sell slaves. It is for liars."
The 1995 21st Century King James Bible kept the original interpretation - no homosexuals or sodomites mentioned:
"It is for whoremongers, for those who defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjurers"
This is after the 1985 New King Jame Bible went after the sodomites:
"It is for fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers"
Uh oh - in 1995 the AMERICAN BIBLE Society released there own rewritten version of the bible:
"The Law was written for people who are sexual perverts or who live as homosexuals or are kidnappers or liars or won't tell the truth in court"
They removed adulterers! and wrote in homosexuals who "live as homosexuals" (love the sinner - hate the sin mode).
Along the same line - another new bible was rewritten in 2001 - by a Christian publishing house - more love the sinner hate the sin:
"It is for the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers,[a] liars, perjurers"
Then there is "THE MESSAGE" Bible released in the mid-1990 and re-released every two years since - must be a big seller - check out this rewrite - talk about putting words into GOD's MOUTH that were never there:
"The law code isn't primarily for people who live responsibly, but for the irresponsible, who defy all authority,
riding roughshod over God, life, sex, truth, whatever!" (Whatever - really !!!)
At least they took the gay hate out.
Obama is right on as usual - which Bible are you going to follow if you want to make laws based on Biblical verses??
Posted by: RJP3 | Jun 24, 2008 8:18:05 PM
RJP3, am I really ignorant? You give Dobson far too much credit. First of all, the accusation Dobson levels @ Obama has little to do with homosexuality. But for the sake of argument, you stated yourself "The Catholic Bible (the original Bible BTW) and the first protestant King James Bible do not have the word homosexual anywhere in them."
Tell me, if "Dobson, The Mormons, and the like - [are] anti-christs and unchristian to the core", then what is your definition of a GOOD Christian? Whatever you answer--those are the values you share in common with the Christian community. Try tolerating those you believe are intolerant of you.
Obviously a person CAN pick and choose what they believe--and we all do.
Posted by: premium310 | Jun 24, 2008 8:38:50 PM
premium
Did you even pay atention to what Obama said?
One biggie was that the sermon on the mount being put into practice in running this country ala what the xtianistas claim they want = the utter destruction of the US armed services.
Obama's said if we did get rid of everybody who is not a xtian, then you have to fight about whose xtianity ala dobson's or sharpton's.
The entire point was that america can never be run as a "xtian" country like dobson drools for.
It would be
1- utter chaos
2- the destruction of many of our institutions that keep us safe
Kudos and ^5 to obama. Religion has NO place in politics.
America was founded on PAGAN Greco Roman ides of governance. Flavored with british common law which predates xtianity coming to the british isles by centuries, the Iriquois Nation model, etc.
Pleas don't try something about morality and murder. There is no connection to preventing murder in a society and morality.
Plato sumed it up best with the whole idea of a social contract and the surenering of ones ability to lets say murder for the better managment and running of the larger body/ greater whole= society.
Posted by: Jimmyboyo | Jun 24, 2008 8:39:03 PM
You know, I don't usually wish bodily harm on people, but one can only hope that this asshole joins Jerry Falwell all too soon.
Posted by: Tread | Jun 24, 2008 9:29:14 PM
Ah Premium - your reply really does not make any more sense than your original post.
I have no intention of tolerating the intolerant - and no wise or good man should.
Because we all pick and choose - Mr. Dobson and his ilk can not force what they CHOOSE to believe onto others - because their choice is obviously made to dominate others and gain power.
They are not following the words of God - just the words of hate - written into the bible by man.
It is a great EVIL when you are picking and choosing and rewriting the bible for polical domination and power over a minority group of citizens.
If you CHOOSE to think that is ok....
I stand by my statement choosing to think your way is base and ignorant of the human condition - which is long with examples of religious power players siding with right wing elements to control population for power and wealth.
You know the Vatican was pretty chummy with both Fascist Rome and Fascist Germany.
As for mentioning the original English language bible translations - that is to make an obvious point that the 100's of bible versions to come after it are clear proof of bibles are not the words of God ... they are the words of man with all of mankind's hatred, prejudice and ignorance written around - and obscuring - basic truths about what is good and kind - and making all holy books (including the old testament and the Koran) vile pieces of filth reflecting the dark heart of man - and not the light of love.
Those are the facts jack.
The truth is out - right there in the middle of the all hate, violence and evil that has been written into the old testament, the new testament, the 100's of evangelical and Protestant "Bibles", the Koran. There is no truth however in the laughable "Book of Mormon. Poor sad suckers those Mormons.
I know good and moral - without having to read it in a book filled with hatred and scare tactics.
Posted by: rjp3 | Jun 24, 2008 9:29:57 PM
Jeff,
Read my comment in context. No generation has a "pass" on bigotry and I don't think anyone here is defending fruitcake Dobson, by which I do not mean gay (But as an aside, if one hears him speak, speculation about his sexuality abound.). The origin of the term is the phrase, "as nutty as a fruitcake."
My comment was in regards to Dobson's use of the term "fruitcake" by which his generation means "crazy". My dad, 81, is from the same generation and uses the word "queer" to mean unusual, and looks surprised every time I point out that the meaning of the word has moved on.
Again, none of this is to defend Dobson or to suggest that he's good with glbt. He does great harm to those closeted in religious settings and their families. Not only is he a fruitcake, he's what my friends and I like to call a dangerous "asshat."
Posted by: KJ | Jun 24, 2008 9:32:22 PM
Fruitcake means crazy (maybe the etymology is similar to calling someone "nuts"?) and isn't an anti-gay slur so far as I know. And I'm no Republican, Log Cabin or otherwise.
Dobson has a not of nerve calling someone else a fruitcake. LOL. But most of all Obama's views are in line with a lot of Christianity, just not Dobson's kind. No one thinks Obama is going to get a lot of the evangelical vote. But it's clear that Dobson is nervous that he's going to get some. He's already said he would not support McCain so he's trying to interfere in the election. Frankly I don't think this would be a story at all if the media weren't all over it. (Meaning no one really cares what Dobson thinks at this point. He backed the wrong horse in the primary and now he's irrelevant. *smirk*)
Posted by: Houndentenor | Jun 24, 2008 9:54:19 PM
RJP3, excellent posts with excellent points.
Posted by: Zeke | Jun 24, 2008 10:02:53 PM
I am a bit surprised that no one has even mentioned that Obama's campaign had previously reached out to Focus on the Family to arrange a get together. Taken from CNN.
"Joshua DuBois, Obama's national director of religious affairs, said the Illinois senator is "committed to reaching out to people of faith and standing up for American families."
DuBois had earlier called Focus on the Family to suggest a meeting with the group ahead of the Democratic Party's convention in late August, according to Tom Minnery, the organization's senior vice president for government and public policy."
And I haven't seen anyone from Obama's camp denying the report.
Posted by: Sam | Jun 24, 2008 10:49:10 PM
http://www.jamesdobsondoesntspeakforme.com/
Dobson sucks.
Posted by: banshiii | Jun 24, 2008 11:57:06 PM
Who really gives a shit what Dobson thinks or says? Why do the media pay him any attention? He's a wingnut extremist.
Posted by: Brad | Jun 25, 2008 2:26:10 AM
Dobson's idea of what is traditional is as new as the late 1880s- early 1900s. I wish the media would quit acting like he's knowledgeable on ANY subject.
Posted by: J.P. | Jun 25, 2008 9:39:32 AM
The ORIGINAL Bible was not in Latin (and not Catholic), but Greek (and Hebrew). ALL of the fundamentalists who think they know the literal meaning of every word are lying unless they know NT Greek and Hebrew, which they seldom do.
Dobson, like all his ilk, is a manipulative spinmeister. He did not choose the word "fruitcake" randomly. If it didn't have gay overtones, he would have picked a different word to mean "crazy."
Posted by: Kevinvt | Jun 25, 2008 10:10:13 AM
Why is it that Christians have so much difficulty understanding the few simple rules Jesus related to his Apostles?, then have a need to quote and distort old testiment arcane nonsense
Posted by: Richard S | Jun 25, 2008 2:09:59 PM
sorry, recovering christian here
Posted by: Richard S | Jun 25, 2008 2:31:02 PM
....Dobson is a closeted gay man, as many evangelical speakers are.They all are filled with self-hatred and doubts and cover up their desires with "religious talk" to their flocks who blindly follow what they say. Little, if any talk of God's love and grace are mentioned, only these same tired old issues that THEY keep picking at. Of course they are fiercely rejecting homosexuality because it is the "demon" inside of THEM that they are trying to suppress or destroy. Ted Haggard proved this case for all to see. And still people buy into their crap. Sad. I don't want to live in a Religious Country ruled by religious nuts.That isn't America. That's Saudi Arabia. No thanks. VOTE FOR OBAMA!!!
Silence the crazies out there, people! VOTE FOR OBAMA!
Posted by: tom | Jun 25, 2008 4:07:56 PM