A Solid Christian.

Roy Moore speaks at Voters Value Summit 2017. (Photo: Jared Holt for Right Wing Watch).

Oh, so many evangelicals of the religious reich are propping up Roy Moore with absolute zeal, and a gigantic raft of lies. I’m not going to address all of them; I have a busy day ahead, but some of this, ugh, toxic morality is so damn disgusting. I will make the point that it’s hardly uncommon for men in their late 20s/early 30s to pursue people in their early teens; it happened to me often enough, and yes, that was in the 1970s. That sort of age gap wasn’t as frowned upon then, a man of 32 with a solid career was considered to be a good match for someone 17 to 19 years old, a steady hand, so to speak. Yeah, I know. I am thankful attitudes have changed in that regard. All that said, it does not make that behaviour any less skeevy or questionable. There’s a massive power imbalance there, and that was particularly true in Moore’s case, as he was a district attorney, and most teenagers aren’t completely clear on just how much power is or isn’t contained within that position. Moore was in a position to make an effective threat.

The fact that Moore was so very careful to not engage in intercourse tells me he knew damn well what he was doing was wrong, and he didn’t want to be caught. He certainly didn’t want to be punished in any respect, so he was very cautious. Does the fact he’s been married the last 32 years make it okay? No. I’ve been married for 38 years, together with my partner for 40 years. What does that tell you about the state of my marriage? Nothing. What does that tell you about my character and actions for the last 40 years? Nothing.

I expect many of the evangelicals supporting Moore wouldn’t be upset if a 32 year old wanted to date their teenage daughter, and that really does not make anything better. It makes it much worse.

The American Family Association stood by its endorsement of Moore, writing in a statement, “AFA Action believes Justice Roy Moore to be a truthful man and a solid Christian.” Bryan Fischer, a radio host for AFA’s American Family Radio, wrote that establishment Republicans were turning against Moore because they “despise ordinary Americans like us who believe in the Ten Commandments, natural marriage, normative sexuality, right and wrong, the Constitution as written by the Founders, the rule of law, and the Judeo-Christian tradition of truth claims and moral values.”

I’m an ‘ordinary’ American. I’m mixed race, childfree, bisexual, and identify as female. I’m an atheist who is committed to inclusion and acceptance. I live rural, with one partner and too many animals. I do not believe in the ten commandments, natural marriage, or missionary position only and don’t fuckin’ enjoy it. I don’t believe in the constitution; I think it’s high time for a rewrite. I believe in marriage equality. I do have a strong sense of right and wrong. I somewhat respect law. A lot of it is damn stupid, and needs serious reworking too, and the police system needs to be torn down and redone completely. WTF is the “Judeo-Christian tradition of truth claims and moral values”? Truth claims? Jesus Christ. How about the truth? I’m not allergic to that. I am allergic to the twisted, abusive bullshit you asses present as ‘moral values’. Your ‘moral values’ say Moore is a stand up guy, not a skeevy man who used his position to impose on teenagers. Why in the hell should I pay attention to such a version of “right and wrong” ? No. Just no.

AFA president Tim Wildmon told Religion News Service, “I don’t think this kind of story will change support for him among Christians since he has categorically denied it. Most will see it as dirty politics.”

There are none so blind as those who refuse to see. That little sentiment should be familiar to you all.

Jerry Falwell Jr., one of President Trump’s strongest allies in the Religious Right, told RNS, “It comes down to a question who is more credible in the eyes of the voters — the candidate or the accuser.” He later clarified that he believed the candidate.

Ah, the christian version of bitches be lying. How lovely.

Anti-choice activist Janet Porter wrote in WorldNetDaily that she trusts Moore in part because he doesn’t think her “heartbeat bill,” which would ban abortions as early as six weeks into pregnancy, goes far enough. Porter laid out her theory that Washington Post owner Jeff Bezos encouraged the paper to manufacture accusations against Moore in order to bring him profits. “Not sure who to vote for?” she wrote. “Just look at who the enemy is firing at the hardest. He’s the guy you want.”

Don’t be dragging Lucifer into this mess. Your imaginary archvillain hasn’t done anything. If Moore was such an amazingly upstanding christian, why didn’t he fight off the temptation to impose himself all over one teenager after another? Why, when the urge came over him to accost a teenager or go hunting them at the local mall, was this solid christian not on his knees in prayer? The only enemy here are Moore’s own actions. “Hey, it was a long time ago” does not excuse it. Look at Moore’s attitude towards bodily autonomy rights. Is this a man who views women as full human beings? No.

Ugh, ugh, ugh, so damn disgusting. RWW watch has the full rundown, replete with links.

Further reading from Mano Singham.


  1. sonofrojblake says

    “It comes down to a question who is more credible in the eyes of the voters — the candidate or the accuser.” He later clarified that he believed the candidate.

    C’mon -- that has to raise a smile at least…? That he felt the need to clarify that? Gave me a morbid chuckle that he didn’t feel he could leave that hanging.

  2. says

    “Natural Marriage” is a weird term. In Nature marriage surely isn’t a thing, and family groups depend on species.

    Anyway; surely for those evanjellicle cats it would have to involve their god, thus becoming supernatural marriage?

  3. Curious Digressions says

    People who support Moore also believe that teenage girls are property. They wouldn’t mind Moore wandering around in their back yards, so…

  4. chigau (違う) says

    We would all agree that a solid chocolate easter bunny is better than a hollow one.
    therefore … solid christians are ….
    nah, that doesn’t work

  5. John Morales says

    A clear exercise in hypocrisy. Disgusting.


    (Young Turks — What Alabama Does To Pedophiles — Youtube)

    PS Ephebophile vs. pedophile — pedophiles are partial to pre-pubescent children. And yes, both are vile things, but only one has been (and, apparenly remains) socially acceptable.

    (I’m not trying to be controversial or dismissive, Caine. You know me by now, I hope)

  6. lumipuna says

    AFAIK, “natural law” is the idea that certain moral rules are inherent in universe, above humans, not for the benefit of humans but a goal in themselves. This idea usually appeals to people who defend status quo and social conformity, taking those as granted from social tradition and from their own gut instinct. Humans are basically hardwired to construct moral rules without thinking what’s the point of those rules.

    In Abrahamic religions, God’s moral authority is somehow tied to natural law, but the law itself is expected to persuade even non-believers. Calling it a “natural” rather than “supernatural” law is rhetorical tactic to persuade people who think about the universe in materialistic terms. This, however, typically results in confusion and misunderstanding of natural law.

  7. fusilier says

    caine, in the OP wrote:

    I will make the point that it’s hardly uncommon for men in their late 20s/early 30s to pursue people in their early teens; it happened to me often enough, and yes, that was in the 1970s. That sort of age gap wasn’t as frowned upon then, a man of 32 with a solid career was considered to be a good match for someone 17 to 19 years old, a steady hand, so to speak.

    Holy Excrement of Zeus.

    I graduated from high school in 1967 and any senior dating a freshman was considered pretty skeevy.

    A 32-year-old guy going after a senior would have her Dad, and a few of his buddies from the Jeep plant, having a long tete-a-tete. (Only in Polish or Arabic.)


    James 2:24

  8. says

    John @ 11:

    PS Ephebophile vs. pedophile — pedophiles are partial to pre-pubescent children. And yes, both are vile things, but only one has been (and, apparenly remains) socially acceptable.

    I appreciate you bringing this up, because all the ‘pedophile!’ hysteria has been making me a bit, well, you know. It’s not at all accurate, and it takes away from from adults who do predate on young teens.

  9. says

    Fusilier @ 14:

    There was a world of difference between the early ’60s and the early to mid ’70s. When I was 16, I was dating a 25 year old. The couple across the street from me, 34 year old lawyer, 19 year old wife.

    When I was 14 -- 15, I was still very christian (Calvary chapel), and in the space of one year, received 7 marriage proposals, all from men 28 years old and older. Reflecting back, this was more common behaviour among christians, but there was plenty of it going on in non-religious circles too.

    I don’t think it’s changed all that much, either. What has changed is parental attitudes, at least somewhat. There’s more recognition now of the power imbalance, but adults still pursue teens, and it’s not just men who do so. That sort of thing is still brushed aside, because it’s a thorny issue -- people don’t want to treat teenagers like infants, but at the same time, teens are not adults. People laugh and joke about older women with ‘boy toys’. People sneer at very young women and their ‘sugar daddies’ and so on.

  10. lumipuna says

    therefore … solid christians are ….
    nah, that doesn’t work

    Piss Christ has some solid followers.

  11. lumipuna says

    When Emmanuel Macron was elected, some discussed on whether it’s “weird” of his wife to be 24 years older. I don’t mind weirdness between consenting adults, but I thought it was problematic that they reportedly started dating when he was just 15 (she was a teacher in his school, even). Although apparently they kinda avoided being too close for a while.

    I’m not saying he didn’t initially consent to it (or if he didn’t, what implications that might have for their current relationship), but you couldn’t trust someone’s expression of consent in a situation like that. That’s why teenagers should be off limits for adults -- not because they’d never consent to relationships with adults but because they can’t reliably express non-consent. (Also, just because Macron’s case apparently turned out OK, doesn’t mean it wasn’t risky.)

    Generally, I get the impression that subtleties of sexual consent are still not very widely understood. Progressive advocacy has made teens socially (if not legally) off limits for adults, but many people might interpret it as a sexual normativity (“weirdness”) issue rather than consent issue.

  12. says

    Yeah, at best, you can say it’s a clouded issue, which is why I think you have to focus on the older adult in any relationship with an age disparity. They should be fully aware of the power imbalance, and if they are truly in love with someone, it should not be impossible to wait until they are at least of legal age. And of course, it’s fully possible for people to truly love one another when there’s a large age gap, but given how often such a gap is the result of exploitation, people should reallllly err on the side of caution.

  13. kestrel says

    Caine @16: OK, wow. I did not realize this was a common occurrence (older men asking very young girls to marry them in christian groups). Had the same thing happen to me way back when, while involved with a christian group. At the time, I was 17, so I guess that’s OK… But you see… everyone thought I was 12. And I mean everyone. None of these guys ever asked my age… they were just going after what was, in their minds, a 12-year-old. I had a hard time grasping this at the time and just politely said “no” a lot but now I know it happened to lots of other people, makes me a little sick.

  14. says

    Kestrel, yeeeaah. I think it has a lot to do with compliance; a young girl is much more compliant than an older one, there’s also a great deal less experience, so it’s a matter of a man being able to ‘shape’ a wife. There’s also the childbearing business, the younger you start, the more she can have, and when the kids are getting older, dude still has a fairly young wife. It’s seriously skeevy, no matter how you look at it.

  15. says

    One of the most egalitarian pairs among my friends got acquinted when he was a teacher at her school -- he 23 years, she 17. I do not know the details, because it is none of my business, but I think they started dating only after she finished school and he no longer was her teacher. They seem happy, and in no way or shape conform to gender stereotypes. My brother started dating his wife when he was 23 and she 17 and to this day she says she could not wish for a better husband. Age of consent here is 15 years, and even marriage is allowed with the consent of legal guardian above this age.

    On the other hand when I finished university, I tried a second one. At 23 years among 18 years old people I felt oddly out of place. I was not expecting it, but I really felt the age (experience) difference between them and me. One of my creepy roomates at uni was saying that it is good to get a teenage girlfriend, because you can easily train her to be a good (codeword for obedient) wife. I had more sexist broattitudes then than I do have now, but even then that was creepy and wrong to me.

    But I still think that age of consent at 18 is too high, especially in the light of the fact that teenagers in US have sex anyway and have higher STI and pregnancy rates than in EU. Education is much better than outright prohibition.

    I think there is a grey area for when age disparity becomes a power differential in and of itself, and when the younger persons “yes” cannot be relied upon due to said power differential. Different people mature at different rates and everything cannot be reduced to a simple number “one day before you are a child, one day after you are an adult”.

    But I think that all of that is completely irrelevant to Roy Moore, because there was no “yes” as far as we can tell. All the women said clearly “no” and that is always valid with no grey areas whatsoever.

    Further one of the women was 14 years old when he molested her. There is no mistaking a 14 years old teen for a grown up woman, no matter how mature she looks physically (one of the excuses I glimpsed online for him). I have been hit upon by a 14 years old girl when I was 23 and I was an instructor at summer camp. Physically she could be mistaken for older (in really bad light), but I was not even tempted to reciprocate those advances, because when she spoke she was obviously, evidently and unequivocaly still a child even if I did not know her age.

Leave a Reply