The determination of Dr. Dobson

The great evangelist Billy Graham found himself tarnished by the fall of President Richard Nixon and largely decided to avoid politics after Watergate. It was probably the right decision and led to decades of Graham continuing to be one of the most admired men in America and a leading spiritual light for the nation. His move away from politics served his greater mission.

In the wake of the death of Dr. James Dobson, the founder of Focus on the Family and the star of its iconic radio broadcast, there are many who will argue that Dobson should have done what Graham did. There is little question that toward the end of his time at Focus there was a current of dissatisfaction that the famed child psychologist had become too political and too much of a culture warrior. That criticism is understandable. Dobson probably made his greatest impact while writing books such as The Strong-Willed Child and Dare to Discipline and building out the family friendly ministry that began in California and then blossomed in Colorado Springs. His weekly broadcast had millions of listeners. Focus also developed Adventures in Odyssey, a children’s show that many adults loved, too.

But I want to make a case that Dobson’s turn to politics was important and needed. After Graham walked away from taking sides in America’s political battles, new faces entered the picture. The pastors and television personalities Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson became the premier personalities in what would be called the “Religious Right.” Falwell would begin the Moral Majority, while Robertson would develop the Christian Coalition with Ralph Reed. But both men were hampered by being seen as televangelists in an era when that tag seriously undermined public legitimacy. James Dobson, a child psychologist with an appointment to the medical school at the prestigious University of Southern California, was a new sort of public figure entirely. He had pristine establishment credentials combined with an undeniable commitment to the Bible and a spiritual sincerity that shone through to his audience.

Over time, Dobson would begin to season his radio show with political content. It was still mostly about faith and family, but he found opportunities to address public issues he thought demanded attention. He was careful enough about it early on to really get an audience’s attention when he chose to enter a political controversy. The one that seemed to stand out like a beacon to Dobson’s conscience was a dominant public issue in the 1990s: abortion. Many conservative Christians were devastated when a predominately Republican Supreme Court declined to overrule Roe v. Wade in its Planned Parenthood v. Casey decision. The three justices who co-authored the decision (David Souter, Sandra Day O’Connor, and Anthony Kennedy) had all been appointed by presidents Reagan and Bush.

Major publications such as Time began to realize that the focus of attention had shifted among religious conservatives. They could see that James Dobson and the modern Saul-turned-Paul, former disgraced White House counselor Chuck Colson, represented a new kind of center of political gravity for conservative Christians. These men were highly educated, had held elite positions, and were now drawing dedicated followings. Colson’s Breakpoint was a highly influential short form of content that paired well on Christian radio with the Focus broadcast. The two provided a kind of one-two punch that proved potent.

Dobson, in particular, was determined that the Republican Party would not abandon the pro-life issue. In the late 1990s, Dobson became so frustrated with what he perceived as a weak commitment from the party that he threatened to leave and to take as many people with him as he could. The Republican Party, perhaps recognizing that Dobson could make good on his threat and shipwreck their chances, became increasingly pro-life. By 2008, the pro-choice (but highly popular former mayor of New York) stood essentially no chance of gaining the Republican nomination for president because he refused to change his stance. (Donald Trump, notably, would make the change.)

Without Dobson’s willingness to lay his reputation on the line and to risk making serious enemies by assuming a highly prophetic stance on the life issue, it is not at all clear that we would be where we are today. Roe has been overruled. We are not close to making the United States a pro-life nation, but we are in a new era. Abortion is now open to democratic deliberation and is no longer the pure province of a Supreme Court majority. We are there at least in part because of Dobson’s iron-willed determination and faithfulness.

In the wake of his death, there will be many who will criticize Dobson’s increasing turn toward politics and culture war. Given the choice, I would rather have Dobson’s willingness to upset political equilibrium in the United States and to use his influence in defense of life.