 |
| Roy Moore and his accuser |
While some Republicans at the national level spoke out against Alabama Senate candidate Roy Moore on Thursday in the wake of allegations that he initiated sexual contact with a 14-year-old when he was in his 30s, Republicans from his own state seemed to have a different view — with one citing Jesus’ parents to defend Moore’s alleged behavior.
“Take Joseph and Mary. Mary was a teenager and Joseph was an adult carpenter. They became parents of Jesus,” Alabama state auditor Jim Ziegler told the Washington Examiner on Thursday.
Four women have told the Washington Post that Moore pursued relationships with them when they were teenagers and he was an adult. The women were between the ages of 14 and 18, while Moore was in his 30s at the time, according to the Post.
Leigh Corfman, the woman who was 14 when she says Moore approached her, told the Post that Moore touched her over her bra and underwear and guided her hand to his underwear.
The other three women did not have sexual contact that went beyond kissing. Moore denied the allegations on Thursday, saying they are “completely false” and a “desperate political attack.”
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said that Moore must step aside if the allegations are true, and Sen. John McCain went further, calling on Moore to “immediately step aside.”
Ziegler, on the other hand, said the allegations were “much ado about nothing.”
*************************
I wonder.
Would Ziegler say the same if he found out his 14-year-old daughter had been molested by a 30 year old lecher, even if it happened years ago? How many mothers and fathers would brush that off and say it was "much ado about nothing?"
We know the Evangelical Christians would call for the death penalty had this been a lecherous Democrat running for the US Senate.
How many more fine Christian values are the Evangelicals willing to toss in the sewer in order to get their political agenda passed? They started on this slippery slope when they made their Faustian bargain with the admitted sexual assaulter, Trump, who also bragged that he often barged into the dressing rooms of beauty contestants to see them half naked. And of course, let's not forget that Trump gave radio shock jock, Howard Stern, permission to call his own young daughter "a piece of ass."
In October 2006, Stern told Trump that his daughter Ivanka “looks more voluptuous than ever” but he corrected him: “She’s actually always been very voluptuous.” And then Stern basically baits Trump into giving him the OK to call his daughter “a piece of ass.”
Trump: “My daughter is beautiful.”
Stern: “By the way, your daughter…”
Trump: “She’s beautiful.”
Stern: “Can I say this? A piece of ass.”
Trump: “Yeah.”
Stern: “By the way, your daughter…”
Trump: “She’s beautiful.”
Stern: “Can I say this? A piece of ass.”
Trump: “Yeah.”
Any other decent father would have punched Stern in his lascivious mouth after saying something as smutty as that about his own daughter. We know what men mean when they call a girl or a woman "a piece of ass." It means she is "f**kable." Yet Trump let Stern get away with saying it on the air, because in a malignant narcissist's mind, that's a compliment to HIM. And we've learned over the past two rotten years of Trump that it's ALWAYS about him. Even if it means degrading his own flesh and blood.
That's how the current Evangelical Christian wing of the GOP rolls these days. Nothing is repulsive or offensive to them as long as it gets them their political goals.
Not even pedophilia. It's all good to them.
28 comments:
I knew this was coming and yet I am disgusted, angry and despondent.
Ed Stetzer spoke for the old guard evangelicals when he responded to the WAPO on this...
"Bringing Joseph and Mary into a modern-day molestation accusation, where a 32-year-old prosecutor is accused of molesting a 14-year-old girl, is simultaneously ridiculous and blasphemous…. Even those who followed ancient marriage customs, which we would not follow today, knew the difference between molesting and marriage"
He went on to say he was red hot angry... as he should be.
Shaw, this is horrible. Sadly, this is an unforced error. The evangelical world brought this on themselves. Or, if one prefers, on us. But it is not, nor has it ever been my evangelicalism. And yet the 81% of that tribe who voted for Trump will cast aside this charge and not see that it was their prior acceptance of trump himself that allowed Moore, and Ziegler's comments to even take place.
They are indeed responsible for this.
And right minded believers who are just trying to live their lives like Jesus have been tarred again.
It has been all so predictable... how anyone did not see this coming is beyond me.
Right wing evangelicalism... the group that supported slavery, opposed women's rights, fought the civil rights bill, stood in support of Bob Jones University when they prohibited interracial dating and marriage in the 80's and now supports President Trump as he makes a mockery of the claims of family values and their prior claims of character counts.
No one should be surprised that out of that crowd would come people like Ziegler.
None of those views represent my values or how I view Christianity. Sadly, I suspect I am in the minority.
In the interest of accuracy, I see several folks on Twitter who pointed out that Joseph was more of a step-father.
And I always thought you were innocent until Proven Guilty. Even Bill Clinton was innocent until he was proven guilty. So is Spacey, Blatter, Louis, Weinstein, Weiner, Wenner, Goddard, Schoen, Hannity and to many to list. If someone from 30 years ago accuses someone it seems to be determined fact. Clinton got caught and Louis admitted it but all the others are just accusations even though the majority are liberals and Spacey is in fact a pedophile.
If true one can only consider Judge Moore a seriously flawed and dangerous person. I posted on this over at RN USA.
If only emotionalism could be put in check and reason was firmly fixed in its place.
David: "But it is not, nor has it ever been my evangelicalism."
Nor is it the evangelicalism of certain members of my family and friends. They are as disturbed as most Christians I know are at those who've embraced and excused this behavior by Trump and Moore, et.al.
Dave: "And right minded believers who are just trying to live their lives like Jesus have been tarred again."
You and others who actually practice Christianity are not tarred at all. I believe reasonable and sane people would never confuse your sincere religious beliefs with those who use theirs as a shield to protect them from their hypocrisy. They've shamed themselves and only themselves.
ave: "Sadly, I suspect I am in the minority."
Actually, Dave, THEY are in the minority -- 30% minority. Evangelical Christians who are true to their values and faith are the majority -- I believe. Don't allow the lost minority to discourge you.
skud, it's so funny to hear a conservative worry about "innocent until proven guilty!"
Where were you, my friend, when the Goopers were screaming "LOCK HER UP! LOCK HER UP!?"
The Trumpistas are still screeching that at the top of their Gooper lungs. I don't recall your concern about that then.
Also, I wouldn't be so sure that the majority of the pedophiles are liberals. BTW, isn't that assigning guilt before proof?
Yeah. I thought so.
Kevin, Why do the Evangelicals drag Mary and Joseph into their swamp of immorality?
Kevin, Why do the Evangelicals drag Mary and Joseph into their swamp of immorality?
I'm going with because they were brown people. Jesus was white though. You can look it up.
skud - “Bill Clinton was innocent until he was proven guilty.“
skud, you’ve made this mistake before. Clinton was never proven guilty of anything. First, there was no criminal trial and no criminal conviction. Yes, he was impeached, but impeachment is essentially no more than an indictment. The Senate's job is to try him. They did not find him guilty. That’s why he was not removed from the presidency.
Perhaps you should follow your own advice...or does that advice only apply to republicans that have been accused of wrongdoing?
Skudrunner: And I always thought you were innocent until Proven Guilty.
This is muddling an important distinction which too often gets overlooked in cases like this.
If Roy Moore were on trial in a court of law for these accusations, and we were members of the jury, then he would indeed be entitled to the full presumption of innocence, and we would not, and should not, vote guilty unless the prosecution had proven its case beyond all reasonable doubt. Failing that high standard of proof, we would have to vote not guilty, even if deep down we felt 95% certain he was guilty.
The same would apply to Weinstein, Ailes, Spacey, O'Reilly, and all the rest who have been the targets of similar accusations, if they were on trial and facing prison if convicted.
But this isn't a courtroom and our assessments here of the likelihood of any of these individuals being guilty carry no consequences for them. If we say we feel 95% sure that Moore is guilty, and it eventually turns out he isn't, it won't mean a miscarriage of justice -- it will merely mean we're mistaken.
Legal standards like presumption of innocence apply in legal contexts like trials. They don't apply to members of the public expressing opinions. There's nothing inappropriate about stating such opinions.
Infidel753, thanks for the clarification.
From HuffPost:
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) was the only Republican in the Senate chamber to call on Moore to “immediately” step aside.
On Friday, 2012 Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney joined McCain by saying on Twitter that Moore was “unfit for office and should step aside.”
“Innocent until proven guilty is for criminal convictions, not elections,” Romney tweeted. “I believe Leigh Corfman. Her account is too serious to ignore.”
Roy Moore On Whether He Dated Girls In Their Teens: ‘Not Generally, No’
What does Moore mean by "generally, no?" The definition of "generally" is "in most cases." So can one infer from his statement that in most cases he didn't date girls in their teens (when he was in his 30s) but in some cases he did?
Max Boot:
You may have thought that Republicans had sunk as low as they could possibly go last year when they nominated for the presidency a man who was singularly unfit, morally and mentally, for that post. But, no, once you start racing to the bottom you never quite stop. There is always another level of degeneracy to be plumbed.
Enter Roy Moore, the Republican Senate candidate in Alabama. He believes that “homosexual conduct should be illegal” and that Muslims should not be permitted to serve in Congress. Now the Washington Post reports that this fearless crusader for “traditional values” had a habit of propositioning underage girls.
The current GOP is an open cesspool of perverts, pedophiles, and crooks. MAGA?
The current GOP is an open cesspool of perverts, pedophiles, and crooks...
This statement is troubling. Does it imply all members of the GOP? Or does it imply just the leadership and those in public office?
Given the number of occuances of democrats who have had similar allegations of sexual misconduct leveled against then can the same be said of democrats?
Words have meaning and too often statements are made in a general overall context when specificity is more appropriate and called for.
I find your chosen words troubling because I know many good people who happen to be Republican who are appalled by the activities Moore is alleged to have engaged in 40 years ago.
I know the word are meant for the choir but still...
George Takei Accused of Sexually Assaulting Former Model in 1981
How’s that?
RN, I should have written the current RADICAL Republicans in charge of the GOP. I am not the only one who's labeled them as such. Many GOP pundits and writers have as well. I have also always pointed to the sane Republicans who've been kicked out of the party. Right now it is the Trumpistas and Bannonites running it, and those are the folks I refer to. And I was referring to the sexual predator the current Republican put in the White House.
Yes, the Dems have their share of dirt in sexual politics. Just remember that, for example, WEiner was ostracized and kicked out, Democratic Party contributor Weinstein is a pariah, as he and any other Democrat who engages in sexual molestation should be.
You know me well enough, RN, to know that I do not paint all GOPers with the same brush. Sometime I'm in a hurry and don't always qualify my statements, as I should have in the comment you refer to.
Sam, for you information, George Takei is NOT RUNNING FOR THE US SENATE OR PRESIDENCY.
You and your kind seem not to understand that distinction.
Thank you for your reply Shaw. Of course I knew what you meant as I do know you well. Others who don't know you as well might be deeply offended,and, most important perhaps is it plays into the hands of the "other side".
No he isn’t but he sure has a lot to say, so then he’s FAIR GAME as far as I’m concerned.
With BJC it was that damned blue dress. The six women who said he raped and sexually molested them were never proven in a court of law so he is presumed innocent.
Moore should never have run in the first place because he cannot govern objectively, not that that matters in today's political cesspool.
Ms Shaw, I was not one who was in the lock her up camp. I was in the investigate her and if found guilty then lock her up. We give illegals accused of murder a trial but politicians are castigated for something someone said the did 30 years ago. It does appear that the wagon is rolling and everyone is jumping on. Where were these people 30 years ago and why didn't they say anything then.
Here's George Takei on Twitter. Benefit of the doubt from me, if not Sam.
Right now it is a he said / he said situation, over alleged events nearly 40 years ago. But those that know me understand that non-consensual acts are so antithetical to my values and my practices, the very idea that someone would accuse me of this is quite personally painful.
Skud... as to why people didn't say anything 30 years ago...
How safe do you think it would have been in a state like Alabama to question or accuse the authority of someone like Moore? That girl would've been laughed out of court and marked for life. No one believed women in those days. Until the Weinstein case, it pretty much persisted to this day, as evidenced by the Clinton case.
Note what happened to Monica.
I believe many of these folks truly believe that finally they can speak out with fear of recrimination... and they are doing so against all stripes of people, both left and right.
Isn't that at all possible? Or are you taking the they have to be lying tack we've seen from the FOX News crowd?
Look, on the left as these types of charges are leveled, folks lose jobs as it becomes evident it was true. Witness Weinstein, Louis CK and many others. The guys on FOX News are a bit different in that many of them paid settlements before to keep it quiet.
For years the Christian right, and conservatives in general, said in regards to Clinton, with this much smoke, there must be fire. They were right of course and that is why back then I called for him to resign. He disgraced the office of the presidency.
Maybe you can explain why those folks are singing a different song today? Maybe you can explain why Alabama politicians are saying even if it is true, they'd still vote for Moore over a Dem. Really?
And the answer is yes... the GOP is that bad right now. So bad they would rather have a pedophile who will vote the way they want than an honorable man from the other team in Congress. That's just totally disgusting and anyone supporting that party should be ashamed of themselves.
The Dems ain't perfect, but they'll never say a Democrat who is a pervert or a child molester is better than a Republican.
The problem I have with this is there is no way to prove who is telling the truth unless the accused admits it, like Louis did. How do you prove something that happened 10 to 30 years ago.
How many women came forward and were destroyed by a sitting president and his wife. In Monica's case she kept the proof otherwise she would be completely destroyed as -H- tried to do to her.
As to repubs would vote for moore instead of a democrat, seems like this same thing happened with BJC only parties were changed.
THe Clinton/Lewinsky scandal happened during Clinton's SECOND term, so no, skud, people didn't vote for Clinton after the scandal broke.
One of the women, Junita Brodderick who accused Clinton of rape recanted her accusation, then changed her mind again and said it did happen.
Broaddrick about the incident. Previously, when lawyers in the Paula Jones lawsuit approached Broaddrick directly, she had signed an affidavit in which she described being “hounded” by reporters about rumors of the rape.
Brokkerick in her own words: “I repeatedly denied the allegations and requested that my family’s privacy be respected,” she said in an affidavit. “These allegations are untrue and I had hoped that they would no longer haunt me, or cause further disruption to my family.” But in response to the federal inquiry, Broaddrick said Clinton had raped her.
Clinton, who was by then president, denied the allegation, unambiguously and strongly, through his lawyer. Ken Starr, the lead federal prosecutor, ultimately deemed Broaddrick’s story “inconclusive.”
How do you prove something that happeed 40 years ago? The woman accusing Moore has corroborating evidence: She told her mother and friends, like Junita Brodderick told two of her friends.
Why 40 years to report the incident? In those days people blamed the victim, as they are blaming her now, or they dismissed imappropriate touching a young girl's bodiy as "flirting," or "harmless."
Brodderick would have had a better case against Clinton had she stuck to her story and not recanted. Who got to her? Clintons? or Lucianne Goldberg who got Monica to tell all? No one knows. My instinct is to believe the victim. Clinton has a background of being a sexual predator, just like the current POTUS does. I believe the women who have come forward and told their stories about Trump and his predations. A man who would encourage a lewd radio shock jock to call his own daughter "a piece of ass," has no respect for women and doubtless takes every advantage of them because he's powerful and rich. Like Clinton.
Do you have a daughter, skud? Would you let a dirty old man off the hook from sexual predation just because you found out about it years later? This problem of certain men and their sexual humiliation of girls and women has to stop. Having these girls and women come forth with their stories is good. Maybe if a few powerful men lose their jobs and reputations, whether they're politicians, entertainers, or ordinary men, that will make the predators stop and think about what their actions will cost them.
Those predatory men need to learn to control themselves and their out-of-control sexual urges.
skud - “As to repubs would vote for moore instead of a democrat, seems like this same thing happened with BJC only parties were changed.”
skud, I call false equivalency. First of all, Monica was not a 14 year old child. She was an adult. She was not molested against her will. We was a willing adult participant. Clinton was not impeached for molesting a child. He was impeached for lying to congress...something that seems to be at epidemic proportions with our current administration.
Ms Shaw
I agree that if allegations are true then they should be jailed as sex offenders but we are still governed by innocent until Proven guilty. Brodderick was only one of the women who claimed BJC sexually assaulted them and the press attacked every one of them. Yes I do have daughters, and a wife and granddaughters but I still believe in innocent until proven guilty.
Now it is sexual harassment to tell an off color joke in mixed company because we have lost the ability to say that's just disgusting or I don't appreciate that kind of language, something women did years ago. Do you happen to remember a LaCrosse team that was accused and smeared in the press only to have the "victim" admit she lied. Instead of saying lets look into this the press convicts immediately.
JC, I hope you posted that as a joke because you can't be serious.
Skudrunner wrote: "...but we are still governed by innocent until Proven guilty."
To which Infidel753 already explained above on 11/10, 7:04:
If Roy Moore were on trial in a court of law for these accusations, and we were members of the jury, then he would indeed be entitled to the full presumption of innocence, and we would not, and should not, vote guilty unless the prosecution had proven its case beyond all reasonable doubt. Failing that high standard of proof, we would have to vote not guilty, even if deep down we felt 95% certain he was guilty.
The same would apply to Weinstein, Ailes, Spacey, O'Reilly, and all the rest who have been the targets of similar accusations, if they were on trial and facing prison if convicted.
But this isn't a courtroom and our assessments here of the likelihood of any of these individuals being guilty carry no consequences for them. If we say we feel 95% sure that Moore is guilty, and it eventually turns out he isn't, it won't mean a miscarriage of justice -- it will merely mean we're mistaken.
Trump also has several women who claim he's sexually molested them. Why do you focus only on WJC? Is it because you think all the women claiming harassment and sexual misconduct against Clinton are telling the truth, but those who make the same claims against Trump are lying? None of the claims against Clinton have been proven in a counrt of law, so where's YOUR presumption of innocence for Clinton?
This post is about Roy Moore, a homophobe, a bigot, and pedophile, and the current Republican Party that supports him in all his disgusting glory.
skud, What did I say that you think is a joke?
Post a Comment