imageBob Vander Plaats sent out an email yesterday saying “our critics are distorting the facts.”  He wrote:

I’d like to be perfectly clear….

The Marriage Vow is about setting a higher standard for marriages and families.  This is precisely why we developed The Marriage Vow – A Declaration of Dependence upon MARRIAGE and FAMILY. 

Having presidential candidates and other leaders sign the pledge will provide Americans with evidence of a higher standard and model which will strengthen marriages,  strengthen families, strengthen our economy, and strengthen our society. 

Our critics are distorting the facts and misrepresenting The Marriage Vow.  The preamble to the vow references relevant and sobering data which points to marriages and families being in crisis.  The FAMiLY LEADER has never made the claim, nor ever will, that slavery was better for families.

Ok, but I don’t believe that particular item has had anything to do with why Tim Pawlenty and Herman Cain declined to sign the pledge.  I have said before I don’t necessarily have a problem with what is in the pledge.  The FAMiLY Leader is certainly free to create a pledge for the presidential candidates if they’re going to endorse.  I know David Shedlock, who writes here, has a huge problem with the pledge.  I don’t think Bob’s response will satisfy him.  It seems like they’re ignoring criticism from the faith community.

I guess I was apathetic toward it.  I didn’t appreciate certain aspects of the pledge being called sexist, but that doesn’t mean I think this was a good idea.  I don’t.  Mainly, and I think this is my biggest problem with it, is that it seems like it was thrown together in order to keep The FAMiLY Leader relevant in the 2012 race.  It seemed to me to be more about Bob Vander Plaats than the issues itself.  I also think David brought up some excellent points as well.

Now you have Bob sending out an email trying to get other people to sign it to show their support… Support for a Christian position on the issues?  No, support for The FAMiLY Leader.  I thought the original intent was to use the “Marriage Vow” as a basis for an endorsement?

Below is a video from Bob explaining why they wrote the “Marriage Vow”:

Photo by Dave Davidson

Subscribe For Latest Updates

Sign up to receive stimulating conservative Christian commentary in your inbox.

Invalid email address
We promise not to spam you. You can unsubscribe at any time.
  1. You don’t have a problem with Bob Vander Plaats implying slavery was beneficial to black children which is a complete lie?

  2. I rarely agree with Rachel Maddow, but I think she nailed it on the head a few days ago when she said the pledge was put forth by a group that is desperate to have their name said on the news.  The entire pledge was pretty subjective and it gave the impression that any decision The Family Leader didn’t agree with could be a violation of the pledge (for instance what kind of judge is going to adequately fill the role of a “faithful constitutionalist”).  If a candidate is going to sign a pledge, I would rather it be based on concrete promises of action that we can objectively measure.  The whole thing just seems like a desperate attempt to remain in the media spotlight.

  3. The whole pledge thing is stupid and serves no purpose.

    I want a leader who leads a highly principled life and has strong personal values, but that is not shown by signing a piece of paper.  Their whole lives will show what their beliefs and values are, and that’s what you can trust…or not.

    I think this was an attempt to make social issues the primary focus, and this I believe is a mistake.  Yes, there’s a lot of rottenness in the fabric of our society but it is not something that can be straightened out with laws or by federal government edicts.  So, what is their purpose…to show they are for good marriages and families, mom and apple pie? 

    Our country is going down the tubes economically and constitutionally because of the federal government, and they need to start addressing that.  That’s what we are electing them for.  We’ll take care of our own marriages and families, they need to focus on their own area of responsibility and remove themselves from ours.

Comments are closed.

You May Also Like

Greenfield’s Weird Excuse for Scrubbing Her Bio

Theresa Greenfield’s campaign explained that they edited the candidate’s biography on her campaign website to create “more room” for website changes.

Is Rick Perry Slighting Iowa? Rick Santorum is the First to “Welcome” Him to the Race

I was out in the hinterlands (aka Northern Minnesota) the last few…

Blum Releases Two Ads in Iowa’s 1st Congressional District Race

Congressman Rod Blum (R-Iowa) released two TV ads in the past week in his bid to be re-elected for a third term representing Iowa’s 1st Congressional District.

Donald Trump & Freedom of the Press

Donald Trump believes freedom of the press doesn’t mean newspapers and others are allowed to say whatever they want even if false. This is what it means.