How can supporting Roy Moore be consistent with Christianity?

[umbrabates]

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

 

[Basil the Great]

Welcome to the forums, umbrabates. I trust that you find your time here enjoyable and interesting.

Most supporters of Roy Moore in the December election will probably tell you that they voted for him so due to the abortion issue. As to why they supported him over Luther Strange in the Republican Primary, I am less certain, but the answer is likely because they associated Strange with the Republican Congress and they are not pleased with how things have gone in Congress lately. Remember that the sexual charges against Moore only came to light after he won the primary. Had they become public before the Republican Primary, Strange might have won.

 

[Ronald]

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

A man is innocent until proven guilty. Many say these were false charges made up by the Left so their guy would be elected. How ingenious, has that ever been done before?
My question is, why would an atheist be concerned about how Christians view this man or the world? They seem to be against anything we do, against Christ, against our beliefs, and many are not really seeking anything on this forum but come to just argue with, dismantle are views and make a mockery -- kinda like what you just did. You are putting Christianity on trial because of people voting for this guy. Oh well, he lost anyways ... so now you can go to another topic and struggle with some more of our views.

 

[Radagast]

The claims of his accusers seem believable

To some people, but not to others.

are corroborated by the testimonies of others

Are they? I'm not American, so haven't really been following the story closely, but I've seen no such corroboration.

and have supporting evidence such as the yearbook signing

Which had a number of questions hanging over it. Last I heard, there was an admission that the woman involved had written part of the inscription herself, and no handwriting expert had seen the actual yearbook.

and the graduation card signed by Moore.

I hadn't heard of that one.

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

There's clearly a bunch of people in Alabama who believe that the most likely explanation of the facts is that the accusations were fabricated for political reasons (and a bunch of different people who believe that the accusations are true, or at least plausible).

 

[Winken]

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

Judge Moore needs to confess, if he engaged in unacceptable behavior. Christians forgive those who confess their sins. That does not mean that we are against worldly prosecution in a fair trial. The law takes its course.

 

[Radagast]

That does not mean that we are against worldly prosecution in a fair trial.

Well, in this case, the allegations are so old that there can be no trial.

 

[Winken]

Well, in this case, the allegations are so old that there can be no trial.

Does that include civil trial? Or how about lawsuits?

 

[Radagast]

Does that include civil trial? Or how about lawsuits?

Good question. I have no idea. I assume that if there were grounds for a civil trial, Gloria Allred would have filed already.

 

[Winken]

Good question. I have no idea. I assume that if there were grounds for a civil trial, Gloria Allred would have filed already.

Yep, she is the one they would go to, consolidating all the cases into one humongous lawsuit. I'm not up on civil trial, either.

 

[Radagast]

Yep, she is the one they would go to, consolidating all the cases into one humongous lawsuit. I'm not up on civil trial, either.

Well, most of the allegations were that Moore, when in his early 30s, went on non-sexual dates with 17- and 18-year-old girls. There's no illegality or lawsuit there.

The Corfman and Nelson allegations are the serious ones. Of those, only the Nelson allegation had evidence (the yearbook). But, given the alterations Nelson made to the yearbook herself, I can't see an Alabama jury awarding any kind of settlement to her. And given the intense media scrutiny, it's hard to imagine any additional evidence yet to be uncovered exists.

 

[umbrabates]

A man is innocent until proven guilty.

This is true in a court of law, however, we are not sitting on a jury.

If I were sitting on a jury, I would have no problem convicting Roy Moore of perjury. He claims he doesn't know these women, but, to me, the graduation card and yearbook are evidence enough that he is lying.

Could I convict him of endangering the welfare of a child, sexual assault, or any of the other crimes he is being accused of? ... that's difficult to say without more evidence. At this point, I would say no.

But that's not what the people of Alabama were asked to do. The real question is does this man have the character to represent the state in the U.S. Senate and the American people in international relations? I think the claims are reasonable enough to say no. And I thought that Christianity embraced honesty, integrity, protecting children, and human decency. This individual seems to lack all of those traits. Yet, he was upheld as a good Christian.

I am honestly just trying to understand what looks to be a contradiction.

My question is, why would an atheist be concerned about how Christians view this man or the world? They seem to be against anything we do, against Christ, against our beliefs, and many are not really seeking anything on this forum but come to just argue with, dismantle are views and make a mockery -- kinda like what you just did. You are putting Christianity on trial because of people voting for this guy.

I am so sorry if I gave you the impression of mockery. I can only ask that you believe that I come from a place of genuine intellectual curiosity, a genuine attempt to understand.

I don't know what your encounters with atheists have been like. I come from a Christian background. I respect the teachings of Jesus. I embrace the beatitudes. I, personally, don't accept that Jesus is divine, but I respect the fact that you do.

Please, don't project past encounters you've had with atheists on to me. Rather, judge me by your encounters with me. Please accept my apology if you feel I have mocked you or your faith.

 

[umbrabates]

Judge Moore needs to confess, if he engaged in unacceptable behavior. Christians forgive those who confess their sins. That does not mean that we are against worldly prosecution in a fair trial. The law takes its course.

I understand the concept of forgiveness of sins. Certainly, you would forgive a member of the community who succumbed to alcoholism and is now on the road to recovery. That doesn't mean it's a good idea to make him the school bus driver.

If Roy Moore does have pedophilic or sexually deviant or abusive proclivities, placing him in a position of greater power where these temptations may further eat away at him isn't doing anyone, including him, any favors.

 

[umbrabates]

But, given the alterations Nelson made to the yearbook herself, I can't see an Alabama jury awarding any kind of settlement to her..

All she did was add Moore's title, the date and the place -- in her own handwriting. That was it. She added a note. If I were a jurist, in my judgement, that in no way disqualifies Moore's signature as evidence he knew her.

 

[Radagast]

All she did was add Moore's title, the date and the place -- in her own handwriting. That was it. She added a note.

Well, (1) the defence would hint that maybe she wrote more, and (2) her initial public statements were that Roy Moore signed it "Roy Moore DA," which the defence would use to question either her veracity or her recollection of the past.

Given that a civil lawsuit would have a higher burden of proof than the election, and given the election result, I still think an Alabama jury would back Moore in a civil lawsuit.

 

[umbrabates]

Given that a civil lawsuit would have a higher burden of proof than the election, and given the election result, I still think an Alabama jury would back Moore in a civil lawsuit.

You may be right on that count. There may be enough there for a good lawyer to sow a shadow of doubt.

 

[Ronald]

This is true in a court of law, however, we are not sitting on a jury.

If I were sitting on a jury, I would have no problem convicting Roy Moore of perjury. He claims he doesn't know these women, but, to me, the graduation card and yearbook are evidence enough that he is lying.

Could I convict him of endangering the welfare of a child, sexual assault, or any of the other crimes he is being accused of? ... that's difficult to say without more evidence. At this point, I would say no.

But that's not what the people of Alabama were asked to do. The real question is does this man have the character to represent the state in the U.S. Senate and the American people in international relations? I think the claims are reasonable enough to say no. And I thought that Christianity embraced honesty, integrity, protecting children, and human decency. This individual seems to lack all of those traits. Yet, he was upheld as a good Christian.

I am honestly just trying to understand what looks to be a contradiction.



I am so sorry if I gave you the impression of mockery. I can only ask that you believe that I come from a place of genuine intellectual curiosity, a genuine attempt to understand.

I don't know what your encounters with atheists have been like. I come from a Christian background. I respect the teachings of Jesus. I embrace the beatitudes. I, personally, don't accept that Jesus is divine, but I respect the fact that you do.

Please, don't project past encounters you've had with atheists on to me. Rather, judge me by your encounters with me. Please accept my apology if you feel I have mocked you or your faith.

Forgive me for lumping you in with many I've encountered. There is hope for a curious heart with their door open. I don't know why I voted for Arnold ... I guess because of his conservative views, not his private life.
Christians aren't better than anyone else, we are all sinners. Positionally because we are saved, but our character has shown the countless flaws that anyone else has. A couple things: I am aware of sin, more so than before. Before, I might have done something wrong, knew it, but would hide it, make up excuses, deny it, etc. Now I see it in my own life, am sorry, repent and ask for forgiveness. Forgiveness has become precious. Mercy is as well. So now we must also be forgiving and merciful towards others, see them as just another fallen creature who fails. Obviously politicians lie to save their asses. The whole government is corrupt and everyone would probably claim to be a Christian. Still some good guys in there though.
If we really knew everyone's sin or even their thoughts, none of us would support anyone. God says we are all like dirty rags and only He can cleanse us. This is why we need mercy and forgiveness.

 

[Radagast]

You see, I think Democrats have more in common with Christian teachings than Republicans.

However, you are not a Christian.

 

[FireDragon76]

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

Just keep in mind it was Alabama politics. Not all Christians live in Alabama.

Some Christians, particularly conservative evangelicals, will have a tribalist mentality and will circle-the-wagons in a heartbeat when they perceivse one of their heroes under attack. I don't think most Christians are necessarily like that.

 

[DaisyDay]

A man is innocent until proven guilty.

No, he isn't. He is guilty or innocent according to his actions and motives. Whether or not this was taken to court doesn't affect his actual guilt or innocence.

Presumed innocent in a court of law is honored mainly in the breach. You yourself seem to preach it irregularly according to how you personally view the person's status.

 

[Nithavela]

Because of abortions.

 

[Ronald]

No, he isn't. He is guilty or innocent according to his actions and motives. Whether or not this was taken to court doesn't affect his actual guilt or innocence.

Well, you are correct but only in God's eyes or the person who has committed a crime. No one else knows for sure until He is given a fair trial under the laws of the land.