By Father Jonathan Morris
FOX News Religion Contributor

On June 28, 2006 Barack Obama gave a speech about the role of religious belief in the public square. His intervention was thoughtful, respectful, and, in my opinion, it advanced this important debate—something no Democrat of note has done of late. The same speech also revealed what I believe is the fatal flaw of Obama, the candidate: the inconsistency between his smart analysis and his subsequent action.

Last week, James Dobson took to the airwaves to denounce Senator Obama’s 2006 speech for “deliberately distorting the traditional understanding of the Bible to fit his own confused theology”, for promoting a “morality of the lowest common denominator”, and most notably, for holding a “fruitcake interpretation of the Constitution.”

Senator Obama has at times been guilty of all three of these defects, but in my opinion, Mr. Dobson’s scrutiny of the speech didn’t quite hit the mark. He failed to point out the speech’s many merits, and instead gave the media sound bites which made Obama look like a statesman when he subsequently dismissed Mr. Dobson’s biting radio address as more divisive rhetoric from the right.

Dobson tried to summarize Obama’s lengthy keynote address by saying Obama believes, “unless everybody agrees, we have no right to fight for what we believe in.”

That certainly would be a “fruitcake” interpretation of the Constitution, but this is hardly a fair characterization of the senator’s speech. To his credit, in this speech Senator Obama rejected as fallacious the idea of seeking a morality of “the lowest common denominator.” He said he used bad judgment when he used this fallacy against Allan Keyes in their race for the Illinois senate seat:

“I answered [Mr. Keyes] with what has come to be the typically liberal response in such debates, namely, that we live in a pluralistic society, that I can’t impose my own religious views on others, that I was running to be U.S. Senator and not the Minister of Illinois.”

Surprisingly, Senator Obama even admitted to double-talk: “I was also aware my answer did not adequately address the role my faith has in guiding my own beliefs.”

Why did he use against Keyes a “typically liberal response” when he didn’t believe in it? I don’t know, but remember the fatal flaw.

The second great merit of Senator Obama’s 2006 speech was his excellent explanation of how religion can work in a truly pluralistic society:

“But what I am suggesting is this—secularists are wrong when they ask believers to leave their religion at the door before entering in to the public square. Frederick Douglas, Abraham Lincoln, Williams Jennings Bryant, Dorothy Day, Martin Luther King—indeed, the majority of great reformers in American history—were not only motivated by faith, but repeatedly used religious language to argue for their cause. So to say that men and women should not inject their “personal morality” into public policy debates is a practical absurdity. Our law is by definition a codification of morality, much of it grounded in the Judeo-Christian tradition.”

Very smart analysis, indeed!

The third great merit of Senator Obama’s speech was his invitation to people of faith to learn how to more effectively influence public policy in a Democratic Republic:

“Democracy demands that the religiously motivated translate their concerns into universal, rather than religion-specific, values. What do I mean by this? It requires that their proposals be subject to argument, and amenable to reason. I may be opposed to abortion for religious reasons, to take one example, but if I seek to pass a law banning the practice, I cannot simply point to the teachings of my church or evoke God’s will. I have to explain why abortion violates some principle that is accessible to people of all faiths, including those with no faith at all.”

Here Senator Obama is exhorting Christians to communicate their religious convictions reasonably, such that a pluralistic society can see the benefits for society’s common good. Tangentially, Senator Obama is suggesting the Christian ethic is indeed reasonable and valid for the pursuit of the common good. Is he talking about natural law, written on the heart of every man and woman? I hope so. That would be very smart analysis.

It is precisely Obama’s smart breakdown of moral issues that frightens me. If this speech is any indication, he thinks through ethical issues better than most—even better than many of his conservative counterparts—and then makes choices which simply do not follow his logic. Senator Obama loves to refer, for example, to “the tragic decision of abortion” as a “moral issue” which concerns him greatly, thus his support of adoption. At the same time he is among the most ardent promoters of every kind of abortion, including the partial-birth abortion legislation in Illinois, and the refusal of primary care to child survivors of botched abortion procedures.

For most people, being concerned about an issue, just like being smart about an issue, translates into good action. It’s called consistency. But Obama’s willingness to use abortion as an example of how people of faith must learn to communicate their universal values more reasonably, then fighting for the exact opposite, is insulting, and frightening. Respect for the life of a hurting baby who has just been born, is the most reasonable thing I can think of. What kind of translation do we need?

Senator Obama’s fatal flaw is his unwillingness or inability to be consistent in word and deed on some very basic issues, of which, abortion is only one. His excellent speech on the urgency of ridding our country of racism, coupled with his simultaneous and strange embrace of pastors spewing reverse racism, was another. Are there more? We’ll find out.

What do you think?

God bless,

Father Jonathan

P.S. For those interested, here is a television interview I did this morning on FOX & Friends in remembrance of the assassination attempt on John Paul II in 1981.

Father Jonathan Morris is author of the new book, “The Promise: God’s Purpose and Plan for when Life Hurts”. You can get it at www.amazon.com or at your local bookstore.