Author Topic: Roy Moore  (Read 16210 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Roy Moore
« on: November 15, 2017, 01:17:00 PM »

Offline Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 34574
  • Tommy Points: -27847
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
CelticsBlog might not be the right place for this, but I’m curious how people see the allegations against him.  As far as I know, there are three classes of allegations:

1. Unlawful groping / sexual contact with a 14 year old;

2.  Attempted sexual assault of a 16+ year old waitress;

3.  Kissing (and perhaps more) with 16+ year olds when he was in his 30s.

#1 and #2 are illegal, and are disqualifying. The accusers seem credible. It’s deviant behavior that shouldn’t be excused. I think the State GOP should boot him from the Party.

#3 gets lumped in with the other allegations, and I guess philosophically, I wonder if it should be. Should legal conduct from 40 years ago be treated as sexual harassment or worse? Does it show poor judgment by Moore? Can we forgive somebody for being creepy in the past, if they’ve had a clean record for 30 - 40 years?

It’s an academic question because of the first two allegations. Moore allegedly crossed the line from creepy to violent criminal. His political career will hopefully be over. But, I do find the concept of “legal but immoral” to be an interesting one as it relates to politics.


Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat.  CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012;
DKC Draft 2015 Champions and beyond...

Re: Roy Moore
« Reply #1 on: November 15, 2017, 01:22:38 PM »

Online kozlodoev

  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17617
  • Tommy Points: 1261
Well, Rush Limbaugh said he was a Democrat when he committed those crimes, so righteous indignation is ok from both sides :P
(Formerly) managing Rilski Sportist to glory at http://www.buzzerbeater.com

Re: Roy Moore
« Reply #2 on: November 15, 2017, 01:44:33 PM »

Offline slamtheking

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18572
  • Tommy Points: 8847
CelticsBlog might not be the right place for this, but I’m curious how people see the allegations against him.  As far as I know, there are three classes of allegations:

1. Unlawful groping / sexual contact with a 14 year old;

2.  Attempted sexual assault of a 16+ year old waitress;

3.  Kissing (and perhaps more) with 16+ year olds when he was in his 30s.

#1 and #2 are illegal, and are disqualifying. The accusers seem credible. It’s deviant behavior that shouldn’t be excused. I think the State GOP should boot him from the Party.

#3 gets lumped in with the other allegations, and I guess philosophically, I wonder if it should be. Should legal conduct from 40 years ago be treated as sexual harassment or worse? Does it show poor judgment by Moore? Can we forgive somebody for being creepy in the past, if they’ve had a clean record for 30 - 40 years?

It’s an academic question because of the first two allegations. Moore allegedly crossed the line from creepy to violent criminal. His political career will hopefully be over. But, I do find the concept of “legal but immoral” to be an interesting one as it relates to politics.
I'm probably a bit pessimistic when it comes to politicians in general but I think pretty much all of them have broken some law or another for personal gain and are for the most part ethically challenged in some regard. 

Moore's accusers seem more credible than him so far.  I found the information concerning his actions at that mall to be more than disturbing and help lend credibility to his accusers. 

Personally, I don't think someone so unable to separate church and state like Moore should be in any elected government position but the current push by the republican party to get him out of the race seems a lot like the pot calling the kettle black.  I seriously doubt there'd be more than a handful of Congressional members that would be able to withstand a full background check of their personal/business/public-service lives.  I have no proof of this but it's just my overall impression and disgust with politicians.

that said, as long as he hasn't broken any laws preventing him from holding office, he should be able to run and let the voters decide -- no matter how misguided they may be.  a number of interviews in Alabama since this story broke have shown the voters just don't care about what he's done.  used to be in this country that type of scandal would be a political death sentence but no longer in the Age of Trump

Re: Roy Moore
« Reply #3 on: November 15, 2017, 01:50:37 PM »

Offline Moranis

  • Global Moderator
  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18612
  • Tommy Points: 874
Depending on what the immoral is, I have no real issue with a politician (or anyone for that matter) being immoral in general. 

Re: Roy Moore
« Reply #4 on: November 15, 2017, 01:58:20 PM »

Offline Fan from VT

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3938
  • Tommy Points: 710
It would be interesting to look at it academically and more broadly, because i wonder how often they are really separate instances. Inother words, for more, all 3 behaviors sound quite related and part of his predatory nature. Its not like he was having sweet romantic dates with some 16 year olds, then tried to rape another 16 year old, then drastically changed it up and groomed/targeted a bulnerable 14 year old girl. Seems like it was all part of a pattern: target young vulnerable kids, exert pressure using emotional manipulation and leverage, and sometimes exert force. I would guess this is tip of the iceberg stuff, given the reports he wasbanned from a mall for praying on teens. This is a guy who worked in the court system who picked out girls who were waiting for custody hearings in the courthouse! Definition of vulnerable and underage kids.


As to the original question, statutory laws will always be tricky, because they have to be defined somewhere. There can be clearly immoral things that are illegal, in which case the person should not belegally barred from something but could absolutely be criticized for by politicians and is suitable for debate for a vote. Also interesting is when something is clearly immoral but legal (underage sex, rape of a spouse, etc), someone does it, then it becomes illegal and they stop. I would say this issubject to criticism justlike the above. And i dont think there is a statute of limitations that makes things off limits if you run for office in terms of whether an opponent cam bring something up for you to address.

Re: Roy Moore
« Reply #5 on: November 15, 2017, 02:12:28 PM »

Offline indeedproceed

  • In The Rafters
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 41607
  • Tommy Points: 2331
  • You ain't the boss of the freakin' bedclothes.
The whataboutism from his backers is infuriating. What about JFK? What about Bill Clinton? What about this video of Joe Biden that isn't relevant?

Also the 'they didn't file charges so it doesn't count' take is disgusting.

Also the 'the age of consent in Alabama is 16 so the other 2 are not problematic at all' take is gross.

"You've gotta respect a 15-percent 3-point shooter. A guy
like that is always lethal." - Evan 'The God' Turner

Re: Roy Moore
« Reply #6 on: November 15, 2017, 02:15:50 PM »

Online nickagneta

  • Global Moderator
  • Walter Brown
  • ********************************
  • Posts: 32522
  • Tommy Points: 5348
Given Ted Kennedy's involvement in Chappaquiddick and subsequent long career in the Senate, I am not sure anyone on the left currently in the House or Senate should have any problem with Moore's long time past moral decisions.

Personally I think he should step aside due to the allegations and probably for the good of his party. If he continues to run the Republicans could lose a valuable Senate seat.

Re: Roy Moore
« Reply #7 on: November 15, 2017, 02:35:12 PM »

Offline jambr380

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7622
  • Tommy Points: 946
I think the difference between sexual misconduct and rape has become very blurred these past few weeks (Kevin Spacey, Louis CK, Matthew Wiener, etc) and it has seemingly ruined people's careers. While I do not agree with entertainers trying to kiss underage people or asking a co-worker to get naked is fantastic behavior, it does not constitute rape.

In looking at Roy Moore, I think a different level of 'morality' is required. These are people we are electing to help pass laws for our country - there is a very real consequence here. You can make comparisons to Clinton or JFK, but we didn't know about those things until after they were elected and held their positions for some time.

It also doesn't help that the guy is such a hypocrite and slime ball. He literally thinks gay people should be in jail for conducting homosexual activities - even behind closed doors - and has likened it to bestiality. These supposed 'perfect' candidates getting exposed is fantastic and a net positive for the information age.

Re: Roy Moore
« Reply #8 on: November 15, 2017, 03:19:10 PM »

Offline fairweatherfan

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18218
  • Tommy Points: 2461
  • Be the posts you wish to see in the world.
It also doesn't help that the guy is such a hypocrite and slime ball. He literally thinks gay people should be in jail for conducting homosexual activities - even behind closed doors - and has likened it to bestiality. These supposed 'perfect' candidates getting exposed is fantastic and a net positive for the information age.

He also proposed an explicit religious test for holding office - no Muslims allowed in Congress - which is the most overtly anti-Constitutional position I've ever heard any major candidate express. It's literally directly contradicted by the text. And a charitable foundation he promotes turns out to have paid him over $1 million in salary for part-time work, which he lied about, so there's major corruption there too.


Here's something I've never seen before - the National Republican Senate Committee has just "leaked" an internal poll they commissioned showing Moore down 51-39. That's not only way out of whack with any current public poll, but it's gotta be the first time in history a partisan group leaked a poll to promote the idea that their candidate was losing.

Re: Roy Moore
« Reply #9 on: November 15, 2017, 03:20:39 PM »

Offline mef730

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2892
  • Tommy Points: 502
I would guess this is tip of the iceberg stuff, given the reports he wasbanned from a mall for praying on teens.

Well, he does claim to be a very religious guy, but that would be a new way of harassing teenagers...

:D

Mike
Want to learn about frequent flyer miles and flying well for free? Check out my blog here: http://frequentflyermiles101.com/

Actually, check it out even if you don't want to. It'll make me feel good.

Re: Roy Moore
« Reply #10 on: November 15, 2017, 04:43:33 PM »

Offline jambr380

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7622
  • Tommy Points: 946
I would guess this is tip of the iceberg stuff, given the reports he wasbanned from a mall for praying on teens.

Well, he does claim to be a very religious guy, but that would be a new way of harassing teenagers...

:D

Mike

Ha - great catch! Reminds me of one of my favorite Bad Religion songs.

http://www.thebrpage.net/discography/song.asp?songName=Don%27t+Pray+On+Me

Also, great info - as always - from fwf.

Re: Roy Moore
« Reply #11 on: November 15, 2017, 04:54:19 PM »

Offline Vermont Green

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3872
  • Tommy Points: 310
#3 gets lumped in with the other allegations,

I think if#3 was all that was out there, it would not even be a blip on his political radar.  The vast majority of is voter support would remain and the establishment would not even be talking (or being asked) about him.

Unfortunately for Moore, #3 in the context of #1 and #2 is making everything somewhat worse, especially for a guy who plays the bible chip so publicly.

I have another take on him.  He fought to keep a statue of the 10 Commandments in his court house.  It seems that many of his supporters view this as honorable, a righteous god fearing man being persecuted from exercising his faith.

That bothers me.  What if then Gov. Romney had decided he wanted to put a statue of Brigham Young or the book of Mormon or something like that in the State House or the court house.  Would that be viewed as equally honorable or righteous by the rank and file Massachusetts voter?  Or how about if a Jewish judge wanted a star of David in his court room.  Or taken further, if an American Muslim wanted some Islamic religious symbol in his court.

I think religion and "State" should be separate, and more than any place in the courts.  Can a gay man really get a fair trial in Judge Moore's court (for example).  I suppose in theory yes but in reality in this case with this man, I doubt it.  (For those who may not know, Moore is credited with claiming that 9/11 was God's punishment on America for allowing gay marriage).

Is he the type of man (even sexual activities aside) we want leading our country?  What are his supporters willing to overlook in the name of partisanship?

Re: Roy Moore
« Reply #12 on: November 15, 2017, 05:00:22 PM »

Online Neurotic Guy

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12573
  • Tommy Points: 1322
The non-illegal creepy behavior is relevant if it contributes to evidence of a pattern of character-questionable behavior in which more egregious behavior took place (as in Moore's case).   The hypocrisy of Roy Moore makes it worse.   Bill Clinton's infidelity spoke to character but, at least for me, the Lewinsky affair sealed the deal as I thought this crossed a huge line with regard to creepiness and misuse of power. 

The creepy Moore behavior of trying to date or "sweet-talk" 16-18 year olds when he was 30, if not connected to the pattern of predatory behavior would probably be forgivable if it happened 40 years ago and not since.  But with the believable harassment of the 14 yo and the assault of the 16 yo, the creepy stuff gets mixed into an unforgivable pattern.

Re: Roy Moore
« Reply #13 on: November 15, 2017, 05:02:01 PM »

Online kozlodoev

  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17617
  • Tommy Points: 1261
It also doesn't help that the guy is such a hypocrite and slime ball. He literally thinks gay people should be in jail for conducting homosexual activities - even behind closed doors - and has likened it to bestiality. These supposed 'perfect' candidates getting exposed is fantastic and a net positive for the information age.

He also proposed an explicit religious test for holding office - no Muslims allowed in Congress - which is the most overtly anti-Constitutional position I've ever heard any major candidate express. It's literally directly contradicted by the text. And a charitable foundation he promotes turns out to have paid him over $1 million in salary for part-time work, which he lied about, so there's major corruption there too.


Here's something I've never seen before - the National Republican Senate Committee has just "leaked" an internal poll they commissioned showing Moore down 51-39. That's not only way out of whack with any current public poll, but it's gotta be the first time in history a partisan group leaked a poll to promote the idea that their candidate was losing.
The Republicans are intellectually and morally bankrupt right now. That's the only way I can explain the fact that dudes like this one passed their Senate Judicial Committee hearing:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42001038
(Formerly) managing Rilski Sportist to glory at http://www.buzzerbeater.com

Re: Roy Moore
« Reply #14 on: November 15, 2017, 05:23:14 PM »

Offline fairweatherfan

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18218
  • Tommy Points: 2461
  • Be the posts you wish to see in the world.
It also doesn't help that the guy is such a hypocrite and slime ball. He literally thinks gay people should be in jail for conducting homosexual activities - even behind closed doors - and has likened it to bestiality. These supposed 'perfect' candidates getting exposed is fantastic and a net positive for the information age.

He also proposed an explicit religious test for holding office - no Muslims allowed in Congress - which is the most overtly anti-Constitutional position I've ever heard any major candidate express. It's literally directly contradicted by the text. And a charitable foundation he promotes turns out to have paid him over $1 million in salary for part-time work, which he lied about, so there's major corruption there too.


Here's something I've never seen before - the National Republican Senate Committee has just "leaked" an internal poll they commissioned showing Moore down 51-39. That's not only way out of whack with any current public poll, but it's gotta be the first time in history a partisan group leaked a poll to promote the idea that their candidate was losing.
The Republicans are intellectually and morally bankrupt right now. That's the only way I can explain the fact that dudes like this one passed their Senate Judicial Committee hearing:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42001038

I don't disagree, and the ghost hunter guy is amazing and appalling at the same time. Hope he's booted out by the full Senate.

But with the unusual speed at which Republican leadership has abandoned Moore, and now seem to be actively working against him - I think they either already knew he had this stuff in his past or they've asked around and had it, and maybe worse, confirmed. Even though they already didn't like him, that seat is very valuable, and in an ultra-partisan time they dropped him stunningly fast.