Focus on the Family Chairman Dr. James Dobson, no stranger to attacks from the ideological left, has really struck a nerve among some academics and homosexual activists with an opinion piece he penned last week for Time magazine.
The article, titled "Why Two Mommies is One Too Many," appeared in the magazine's Dec. 18 issue -- in response to a request from Time editors for Dr. Dobson's views on word that Mary Cheney, daughter of Vice President Dick Cheney, is expecting a child with her lesbian partner. Although Dr. Dobson made it clear he wasn't attacking Cheney or her partner, Heather Poe, acknowledging he has no reason to doubt they will love their child, his piece did point out that the best environment in which to raise children is a household headed by a married mother and father.
"Love alone is not enough to guarantee healthy growth and development," Dr. Dobson wrote. "The two most loving women in the world cannot provide a daddy for a little boy -- any more than the two most loving men can be complete role models for a little girl.
"The voices that argue otherwise tell us more about our politically correct culture than they do about what children really need. The fact remains that gender matters -- perhaps nowhere more than in regard to child rearing."
Those simple comments -- supported by sound research -- have driven the left's spin machine into a week's worth of overdrive.
"The attack against Dr. Dobson has been as unceasing as it has been baseless," said Carrie Gordon Earll, director of issue analysis for Focus on the Family. "The only thing that can explain the vehemence with which gay activists have responded to his commentary is that it galls them for a major publication like Time -- with a circulation of more than 4 million -- to give a platform to someone like Dr. Dobson, who stands for everything they oppose."
The first attack came in claims from two researchers whose work Dr. Dobson cited in his piece that he had "twisted" their science. They only spoke up, it is worth noting, after being contacted by a gay activist with a long history of personally vilifying pro-family leaders; in fact, he once called Dr. Dobson "a Scripture-spitting, simple-minded, superstitious savage." No matter why the researchers weighed in, though, their objections are off-base, according to Dr. Bill Maier, Focus on the Family's psychologist in residence.
"These are well-respected scientists who probably feel they have no choice but to cry 'foul' because they work in a field that is so dominated by liberal groupthink," Maier explained. "But the fact they aren't happy their data was used to reach a conclusion they disagree with doesn't mean the data was not properly applied. Dr. Dobson never claimed these researchers share his view on this issue -- they clearly do not. But there is no denying that the data they compiled can be appropriately cited to show the unique contributions mothers and fathers make in the lives of their children.
"Many 'progressive' academics would prefer to ignore these unique contributions and claim that mothers or fathers are 'optional,' " he added. "But anyone who takes the time to read the research in question will find that Dr. Dobson quoted the researchers accurately. While these individuals may personally hold positions on same-sex parenting that are different from his, their findings on gender differences clearly support his thesis. The sad fact is that gay parenting intentionally -- and permanently -- deprives a child of either a mommy or a daddy."
Questionable rebuttal
The other attack against Dr. Dobson came in the form of a rebuttal op-ed published in Time's online edition last week. It's written by Jennifer Chrisler, executive director of a pro-gay group called Family Pride, and in it she accuses Dr. Dobson of "lying" about the data he cites to support his conclusions.
Focus on the Family's Earll scoffed at the charge.
"The truth is, Time's editors fact-checked Dr. Dobson's piece before they published it," she said. "Not one fact he laid out was excised as untrue. Calling him a liar just points to the desperation of those on the left. When they can't fight facts with facts, they fight them with name-calling."
In fact, Focus on the Family research analysts did a point-by-point examination of Chrisler's piece and found it to contain many questionable assertions. The most egregious may be this one: "According to the 2000 census, the vast majority -- more than 75% -- of American children, are being raised in families that differ in structure from two married, heterosexual parents and their biological children."
Not true, Focus' analysis finds.
"Anyone can go online to the U.S. Census Bureau's recent data and learn that in 2001, 71 percent of children lived in a two-parent home and 67.6 percent lived with two married parents," the report states. "Of the children living with two parents, 88 percent lived with their biological mother and father, and only 10 percent lived with one biological and one step-parent.
"In fact, the Urban Institute, a liberal child-advocacy organization, reports that a child is more likely to be living with her married parents today than in the mid 1990s, rising 2.5 percentage points since that time."
Chrisler also makes the stale argument that "professional organizations such as the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Psychiatric Association and the National Association of Social Workers have all issued position statements supporting same-sex parents."
What she doesn't say is that the associations that have issued such statements have done so via very small and special-interest driven committees -- hardly representing the views of the groups' entire memberships.
You can read more of the refutations of Chrisler's work by seeing the "FOR MORE INFORMATION" box below, but the outrage over the attacks on Dobson is more than just a case of Focus on the Family coming to its own defense. Prominent academics have written to Time to back up the conclusions of Dr. Dobson's commentary.
"It comforts me as a pediatrician when a health-professions colleague of Dr. Dobson's stature presents the science of child rearing so clearly," wrote Joseph Zanga, M.D., a professor of pediatrics and president of the American College of Pediatricians. "Of course children need a mother and a father, female and male, to optimally guide them through all of their developmental stages to adulthood. This is not new science. It was taught to me in every year of my education through and including medical school."
Robert George, director of the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions at Princeton University, noted the issues Dr. Dobson wrote of are "common sense to most people."
"Dr. James Dobson's critics call him names ('extremist,' 'liar') but actually confirm his central point," George explained. "Their focus is on the wants and preferences of adults, rather than the obligations adults have as a matter of basic justice to children they may conceive."
FOR MORE INFORMATION
To read Focus on the Family's point-by-point rebuttals of the allegations made against Dr. Dobson over his Time commentary, visit the CitizenLink Web site. You can find supporting statements and research for his piece here, and refutations of the points made by Jennifer Chrisler here.
You also can hear more about this subject from Dr. Dobson himself in the January edition of his Focus on the Family newsletter. If you don't receive it at your home, you can find it online beginning Jan. 1.
