How can supporting Roy Moore be consistent with Christianity?

[SoldierOfTheKing]

In contrast, a powerful man sexually objectifying a young woman's body is much more easily excused, even with pseudo-religious justifications if need be.

That's a sin against feminism, not Christianity.

 

[TLK Valentine]

That's a sin against feminism, not Christianity.

I guess it was some radical feminist talking in Matthew 5:28, not a Christian...

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

I guess it was some radical feminist talking in Matthew 5:28, not a Christian...

He was talking about adultery, that is to say, violation of the marriage covenant, not "objectification of women" which is not what the Seventh Commandment forbids. God, as the author of sexuality, is hardly going to be offended by its expression. I note though, that a culture bent on normalizing every sort of perversion, up to and including pedophilia, wants to pathologize mans normal desire for women. In the case of Roy Moore, the majority of what he was criticized for was squarely within the bounds of normal Christian courtship. When the perverted is celebrated, however, there is nothing left to condemn but the normal. Hence we have those who end up in the position of being libertine and prude simultaneously...

 

[wing2000]

...it seems Mr Moore still hasn't accepted the fact that he lost.

Republican Roy Moore filed a lawsuit late Wednesday to delay certification of the Alabama special election results until a "thorough" investigation of "potential election fraud" is conducted.

Roy Moore sues to block Alabama Senate election result

 

[bhsmte]

...it seems Mr Moore still hasn't accepted the fact that he lost.

Republican Roy Moore filed a lawsuit late Wednesday to delay certification of the Alabama special election results until a "thorough" investigation of "potential election fraud" is conducted.

Roy Moore sues to block Alabama Senate election result

Not shocked this guy is in severe denial and manufacturing his own reality.

 

[super animator]

Not shocked this guy is in severe denial and manufacturing his own reality.

I love salty losers.

 

[CitizenD]

Slavery was consistent with Christianity for 1700 years. The fact that Christians in Alabama were willing to overlook Moore's likely transgressions (or accuse the accusers), should be a surprise to exactly no one.

 

[FireDragon76]

That's a sin against feminism, not Christianity.

"Christianity" does not have a particular expertise on recognizing evil.

 

[FireDragon76]

He was talking about adultery, that is to say, violation of the marriage covenant, not "objectification of women" which is not what the Seventh Commandment forbids. God, as the author of sexuality, is hardly going to be offended by its expression. I note though, that a culture bent on normalizing every sort of perversion, up to and including pedophilia, wants to pathologize mans normal desire for women. In the case of Roy Moore, the majority of what he was criticized for was squarely within the bounds of normal Christian courtship.

No wonder the world can't take "Christian morality" seriously anymore.

When the perverted is celebrated, however, there is nothing left to condemn but the normal. Hence we have those who end up in the position of being libertine and prude simultaneously...

The only real perverts seem to be in Alabama hiding behind cheap religious platitudes and stunts.

 

[FireDragon76]

Not objectifying women has to do with human dignity, which is fundamental to ALL the commandments on the Second Tablet of the Ten Commandments.

 

[rambot]

He was talking about adultery, that is to say, violation of the marriage covenant, not "objectification of women" which is not what the Seventh Commandment forbids. God, as the author of sexuality, is hardly going to be offended by its expression.

Please explain to me the difference between "objectification of women" and "lusting after women".

We had a Christian psychologist expert in inappropriate content addiction give a talk at our church. In fact, he DEFINED lust as the objectification of women. So I really CANNOT wait to hear how you are going to drive a wedge between those two ideas.

 

[ArmenianJohn]

I have trouble understanding how people who claim to be strong Christians can support a man like Roy Moore and vote to put him in a position of power.

The claims of his accusers seem believable, are corroborated by the testimonies of others, and have supporting evidence such as the yearbook signing and the graduation card signed by Moore.

Moore claims he didn't know these women, but he signed a yearbook and gave a graduation card to another. Clearly, the most likely scenario is that, at the very least, he is lying.

So, why support a man who may have molested children? How can this be supported by Christianity? At the very least, write in a decent candidate like Luther Strange.

I am genuinely curious and struggling to understand this point of view

It's not. I see a lot of people who call themselves "Christians" yet support anti-Christian people like Moore, Trump, etc. and the only way I can see them doing that is that they are Christian but severely ignorant or not intelligent or otherwise deceived.

 

[JGG]

Please explain to me the difference between "objectification of women" and "lusting after women".

We had a Christian psychologist expert in inappropriate content addiction give a talk at our church. In fact, he DEFINED lust as the objectification of women. So I really CANNOT wait to hear how you are going to drive a wedge between those two ideas.

Are you kidding? There's a huge difference between them. Big enough you could drive a tank through it, I assure you. I can't believe you don't see it. @SoldierOfTheKing explain to him the huge difference between them.

 

[rambot]

No wonder the world can't take "Christian morality" seriously anymore.
.

That's not Christian morality. That is a Christian trying to do moral gymnastics so they don't have to vote for a democrat.

 

[rambot]

It's not. I see a lot of people who call themselves "Christians" yet support anti-Christian people like Moore, Trump, etc. and the only way I can see them doing that is that they are Christian in name only.

I'd be careful cause you can't question folks' faith here on CF.

It's pretty simple though; if they are against a democrat, they get the vote. That is all. That is LITERALLY all. There is no logical, empathetic; no real identifiable thought process that I have been able to follow.

To vote for Roy Moore, you need only do one thing: Don't believe any of his victims.

Don't do that and he's just as viable a candidate as anyone else.

And while I'm not super keen to question someone's faith, I am pretty comfortable commenting on their discernment.

 

[ArmenianJohn]

It's pretty simple though; if they are against a democrat, they get the vote. That is all. That is LITERALLY all. There is no logical, empathetic; no real identifiable thought process that I have been able to follow.

That wouldn't be so bad if they would just admit to that. It would at least be honest. I can't understand why they bend over backwards to come up with excuses for the inexcusable.

And while I'm not super keen to question someone's faith, I am pretty comfortable commenting on their discernment.

I changed my post to reflect as much

 

[rambot]

I love salty losers.

I bet you were REALLY hoping from a trump election loss...

Man....could you even imagine?

 

[bhsmte]

I bet you were REALLY hoping from a trump election loss...

Man....could you even imagine?

Trump would have just given his stock line; the election was rigged and gone on his merry way.

Moore, is a league of his own, when it comes to his level of denial with the election.

 

[FireDragon76]

Are you kidding? There's a huge difference between them. Big enough you could drive a tank through it, I assure you. I can't believe you don't see it. @SoldierOfTheKing explain to him the huge difference between them.

It's one thing to find a woman physically attractive. It's another to assume that her body should be available for usage by right.

The attitudes of a certain genital-grabbing politician comes to mind here. Just thinking you can walk into a women's dressing room because you are paying the bills is a perfect example of the objectification of women.

 

[Sketcher]

Personally, I'm glad I'm not in Alabama, so he's not really my problem. What he said about all Constitutional Amendments after the 10th was enough for me to have not supported him if he had been in my state.

As to the accusations, if they're true, he's an evil man. If they're not, then I can see why he would defiantly deny them. But either way, I don't have enough proof to know who is lying. I'd rather see all these proceedings in a court of law myself. If what I have read about statute of limitations in Alabama is correct, the law there would need to change in order to make that a reality.