
Posted on: October 04, 2007
By Bryan Fischer, Executive Director, Idaho Values Alliance
In a guest editorial in today’s New York Times, James Dobson indicates that an overwhelming consensus emerged at last weekend’s gathering of more than 50 pro-family leaders. The nearly unanimous sentiment of those in attendance: “If neither of the two major political parties nominates an individual who pledges himself or herself to the sanctity of human life, we will join others in voting for a minor-party candidate.”
The vote on this resolution came after two hours of deliberation. There was, however, no consensus on the advisability of actually creating a third party if Democrats and Republicans abandon unborn human life.
Said Dobson, “I firmly believe that the selection of a president should begin with a recommitment to traditional moral values and beliefs. Those include the sanctity of human life, the institution of marriage, and other inviolable pro-family principles.”
He goes on, correctly in my view, to say that voting for a candidate just because he can win is a perfect recipe for compromising cherished beliefs, and Christian leaders simply cannot afford to do that. “Winning the presidential election is vitally important, but not at the expense of what we hold most dear.”
Dobson also flatly declares that secular media reports that the conservative Christian movement is “hopelessly fractured” and “internally antagonistic” are simply not true, and argues that the near unanimity on the Salt Lake resolution is evidence of “much greater harmony” than the old media would lead the public to believe.
He makes the further point that if the old media wants to see just how unified pro-family advocates are, just watch what happens if both major political parties abandon conservative principles in 2008.
Every Democratic candidate for presidency is avowedly pro-abortion, while in the Republican chase only Rudy Giuliani is. The rest of the GOP field is generally speaking in the pro-life camp, although not all are as firm as conservatives would like them to be (Sen. McCain, for example, supports embryonic stem cell research, Thompson opposes a human life amendment, and Romney until recently was pro-abortion).
The bottom line is that if Giuliani wins the GOP nomination, the Democratic candidate will almost certainly win the presidency. The next president is quite likely to fill three seats on the bench of the Supreme Court, and we can be sure that a Democratic president will appoint activist judges who will uphold Roe v. Wade and increasingly lean on international judicial opinions for guidance in their rulings.
Disillusionment among rank-and-file conservatives will likely give secularist liberals even firmer control of both the House and the Senate, and the Democrats even may find themselves close to a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate.
A Giuliani nomination, in other words, means that all three major branches of the federal government will be in the hands of those with a relentlessly anti-life, pro-homosexual anti-religious liberty agenda, for years if not decades to come. That is a truly sobering prospect, and should make clear to everyone in the pro-family community just what is at stake in 2008 with regard to our future, the future of our children, and the future of our grandchildren.
Commenting is closed for this article.
Click here to go to Columns Archives

Of the readers out there, do you believe that if Religious Right voters vote for a minor party candidate that it could swing the election?
Can a minor party candidate win?
We would love to hear your opinion.
— Idaho Examiner · Oct 4, 03:26 PM · #