I know Roy Moore. He’s always been a con artist.

[wing2000]

...revealed for the fraud he is: Moore misrepresents American, Evangelical and Baptist values.

"The Republican Senate nominee has fashioned an entire career out of subterfuge and self-misrepresentation — as a constitutional authority, as a Baptist and as a spokesman for evangelical values. The recent allegations of sexual misconduct, together with his many specious statements over the years — that the First Amendment guarantees religious freedom only for Christians, for example, or that many communities in the United States stagger under the burden of Islamic sharia law — underscore both his hypocrisy and his tenuous grasp of reality."
- Randall Balmer, Historian and author of several books on Evangelicals

Perspective | I know Roy Moore. He’s always been a con artist.

 

[hislegacy]

The author has never said a good word about anyone or any action of the Religious Right, as he calls them, in over 27 years.

Why should anyone believe him?

To balance this out, shall we go to an equally partisan right source?

 

[Belk]

The author has never said a good word about anyone or any action of the Religious Right, as he calls them, in over 27 years.

Why should anyone believe him?

To balance this out, shall we go to an equally partisan right source?

Do you have any reason to believe he is being mendacious other then his lack of praise for the religious right?

 

[cow451]

The author has never said a good word about anyone or any action of the Religious Right, as he calls them, in over 27 years.

Why should anyone believe him?

To balance this out, shall we go to an equally partisan right source?

Those sources have been quite vocal. So neither pro-Moore or anti-Moore can claim they have not been heard.

 

[hislegacy]

Do you have any reason to believe he is being mendacious other then his lack of praise for the religious right?

Mendacious, no because I thinks he believes what he writes so he views it as truth. He is as far left as Breitbart is far right. His truthfulness according to what he sees and perceives is not in question.

It is the accuracy or balance of his views that are skewed.

No one group is 100% wrong continuously and that is how he has always portrayed the religious fight.

 

[wing2000]

The author has never said a good word about anyone or any action of the Religious Right, as he calls them, in over 27 years.

Why should anyone believe him?

To balance this out, shall we go to an equally partisan right source?

Sure, go ahead and find a partisan "right" source who can present a historically accurate counter- argument to Blamer who has rejected what some Evangelicals have become over the last two decades:

"...Moore does not represent the evangelical movement he claims to herald. Historically, evangelicalism once stood for people on the margins, those Jesus called “the least of these.” Evangelicals in the 19th century advocated public education, so that children from less-affluent families could toe the first rungs of the ladder toward socioeconomic stability. They worked for prison reform and the abolition of slavery. They advocated equal rights, including voting rights, for women and the rights of workers to organize. The agenda of 19th- and early-20th-century evangelicals is a far cry from that of Moore and the religious right. I leave it to others to determine which version of “evangelical values” better comports with the words of Jesus, who instructed his followers to visit the prisoners, feed the hungry, welcome the stranger and care for the needy."

.

 

[Rion]

Probably should have put that in quotes. I was wondering why you hadn't spoke up before.

 

[hislegacy]

Combine that with the audacity of his title.

I know Roy more.

Are they personal acquaintances?

Has he met with him and discussed his beliefs?

Or is he just one that knows about a person but really doesn’t know them?

I could say I know you but my knowledge is limited to this form so I can say I know about you but I can’t say I know you

 

[hislegacy]

Sure, go ahead and find a partisan "right" source who can present a historically accurate counter- argument to Blamer who has rejected what some Evangelicals have become over the last two decades:

You do realize that his quote is his view, an opinion, nothing more.

He is not part of the Religious Right, just sits in judgement on them over what he perceives, yet what is this Ordained minister doing differently?

Beyond a two decade complaint that the right are not presenting the Gospel, what has he done to do so?

 

[wing2000]

You do realize that his quote is his view, an opinion, nothing more.

Yes, a well-informed opinion.

Dr. Balmer has published more than a dozen books, including Redeemer: The Life of Jimmy Carter and The Making of Evangelicalism: From Revivalism to Politics and Beyond. His second book, Mine Eyes Have Seen the Glory: A Journey into the Evangelical Subculture in America, now in its fifth edition, was made into an award-winning, three-part documentary for PBS. Dr. Balmer wrote and hosted that series as well as a two-part series on creationism and a documentary on Billy Graham.

Randall Balmer, Dartmouth College

 

[hislegacy]

Yes, a well-informed opinion

That is where our opinions differ.

 

[Basil the Great]

How could he be a con artist? He is a devout Christian or so everyone says.

 

[Belk]

Mendacious, no because I thinks he believes what he writes so he views it as truth. He is as far left as Breitbart is far right. His truthfulness according to what he sees and perceives is not in question.

It is the accuracy or balance of his views that are skewed.

No one group is 100% wrong continuously and that is how he has always portrayed the religious fight.

Thank you for explaining.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Do you have any reason to believe he is being mendacious other then his lack of praise for the religious right?

Does he need any other reason?

Those who criticize The Party are the enemy. Those who don't praise The Party enough are, in effect, criticizing it.

 

[Belk]

Does he need any other reason?

Those who criticize The Party are the enemy. Those who don't praise The Party enough are, in effect, criticizing it.

Let us not be to quick to assign nefarious purpose to those who disagree with us. The enemy, as you correctly identify, is tribal thinking. We should be careful lest we fall into that trap ourselves.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Why should anyone believe him?
To balance this out, shall we go to an equally partisan right source?

...for one, there are numerous other sources that corroborate the information and it's based on things that Moore is on the record saying.

For example:

The bit criticizing him for saying the first amendment only protects Christianity...

Here are Moore's actual words (and there are numerous sources reporting it, and video of him saying it)
“Let’s get real. Let’s learn our history. Let’s stop playing games,” said Moore at the Jackson, Miss. event.

“Everybody, to include the U.S. Supreme Court, has been deceived as to one little word in the First Amendment called ‘religion.’ They can’t define it,” the state’s chief justice said. “They can’t define it the way Mason, Madison and even the United State Supreme Court defined it, ‘the duties we owe to the creator and the manner of discharging it.’ They don’t want to do that, because that acknowledges a creator god.”

“Buddha didn’t create us. Mohammed didn’t create us. It’s the god of the Holy Scriptures,” said Moore.


As far as him making the false claims about how "Americans are suffering under Sharia Law"
(again, numerous sources and video confirm this)
Moore responded, "There are communities under Sharia law right now in our country. Up in Illinois. Christian communities; I don’t know if they may be Muslim communities. But Sharia law is a little different from American law. It is founded on religious concepts."

Stein pressed Moore to name the communities under Sharia law. He responded, "Well, there’s Sharia law, as I understand it, in Illinois, Indiana -- up there. I don't know."

Later in the interview, Stein tried again, asking Moore to be specific and name which communities he was referring to. Moore said, "I was informed that there were. But if they’re not, it doesn’t matter. Sharia law incorporates Muslim law into the law.




There are instances where it's perfectly valid to criticize a source...however, there are other times where the leaning of the source doesn't matter. For example, if Fox news reports that 2+2=4, that's not conservative bias, if CNN reports that triangles have 3 sides, that's not liberal bias.

Facts are facts. In this instance, the issues being pointed out about Moore are facts that we have video footage to confirm, the author's history with the religious right is irrelevant.

 

[cow451]

How could he be a con artist? He is a devout Christian or so everyone says.

Church is a great cover for criminal activity. Partly because Christians can be susceptible to being too trusting of a brother or sister. Churches are not subject to much regulation and are often operated by laypeople.

 

[cow451]

Now even more men are lying against Mr. Moore! Oh, the utter unfairness of it all.

 

[TLK Valentine]

I know democrats. I was here when Roy first got famous, and I was glad to see that theocrat go.

But that was before it was made apparent the extent to which the dems had gotten in bed with islamic theocrats.

We have been utterly betrayed by the left and their red/green alliance.

Sounds like Royboy is now the big hero... Islam Delenda Est, after all.

 

[FireDragon76]

The author has never said a good word about anyone or any action of the Religious Right, as he calls them, in over 27 years.

Perhaps there is nothing good about them?