Roy Moore accused of sexual contact with 14-year old

[Teallaura]

Yep. We keep our children immature longer than they did 2000 years ago. While back then a person of 15 or so might be an adult, they were raised to be an adult at that age and had life experiences and training to be an adult for the most part. Today we keep our children very sheltered and protected and they are not mature or adults in their teens. I am sure there are exceptions, but I am speaking generally. They are emotionally children. They have no experience. For an adult in their 30s to "date" one of them is an abuse of authority and taking advantage of a child. A minor. And that is immoral.

Kids that married that young also kept living with the boy's family - usually until Dad died.

They weren't more mature - they just had a much better support system.

[Teallaura]

Completely irrelevant. I don't think God particularly cares about your feelings on the matter. You don't make the rules.

Deuteronomy 4:2
Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.

You found a command in Scripture giving the age of consent? Really?

[Teallaura]

No because we are talking society here not exceptions. Would you think it is morally OK for a 30 year old to marry an emotionally mature 14 year old (if there were no laws against it)?

Um, you do know that is legally a possibility, right?

[Teallaura]

Yeah, Yeah, I'd just caught it - I don't get a lot of online time, okay?

[Obsidian]

It most definitely would have been immoral, in ancient Palestine, for a 30 year old man to show up expecting to court a young lady--of any marriageable age--without a male relative present, let alone use that as the mate-finding process. He could not secure permission to court a young lady from her mother, it would have come from her nearest male relative, and he or another minder would have been there monitoring all interactions. In any case, there would have been no courtship, it would have been an arranged marriage sealed with agreements between the father or other male relative and the prospective groom.

I think the Bible is more complex on this issue than you're giving it credit for. It doesn't actually command arranged marriage, or most of the other stuff you're listing.

[H]aving allegedly cruised malls, made a pass at a girl at court, and made unpermitted remarks (without the permission of a male relative) in personal correspondence, he comes across, at worst as a creeper, and at best as a clumsy fool.

There is no difference between a "creeper" and a clumsy fool. When girls refer to a man as a "creep," they simply mean that he is an unattractive fool. The word doesn't carry any actual moral weight.

What the 14-year-old alleges is that Moore was tempted to engage in premarital sex, and that he came close to engaging in it, but that due to her own supposed virtue she convinced him to abstain from any further sin, and take her home. (Funny how none of these women claim to have been actually raped or statutorily-raped by Moore. Instead, they always manage to escape him and emerge as heroes.)

[Obsidian]

Senate hearing, not a judicial hearing - they can have Senate hearings on what to have for breakfast if they like.

One difference would be that in a Senate hearing, Moore would not be entitled to cross-examine the lady. If you're familiar with how Senate hearings work, it's basically just a time to make speeches. The Senators can ask questions, but it's a good bit different from a real trial. And there aren't even any rules of evidence.

[rogue06]

Yep. We keep our children immature longer than they did 2000 years ago. While back then a person of 15 or so might be an adult, they were raised to be an adult at that age and had life experiences and training to be an adult for the most part. Today we keep our children very sheltered and protected and they are not mature or adults in their teens. I am sure there are exceptions, but I am speaking generally. They are emotionally children. They have no experience. For an adult in their 30s to "date" one of them is an abuse of authority and taking advantage of a child. A minor. And that is immoral.

They were forced to "grow up" -- be more responsible. Keep in mind that the whole concept of adolescence is a very modern concept.

[Tassman]

I forgot. Puritanical atheists don't believe in redemption.

I think the trick is that one must repent first. And Roy Moore has yet to even acknowledge his wrongdoing let alone repent...unlike Al Franken who has not only recognised his wrongdoing but sincerely apologised.

[Psychic Missile]

What a dumb question.

That wasn't what this was about, twist it though you may.

I would appreciate answers to my questions. I'm trying to understand your point of view. Is voting for a rapist an immoral act? Is there any immoral thing a person could do that would prohibit you from voting for them?

[firstfloor]

Superior evidence against the existence of God? I'm sorry, but in all of human history you skeptics haven't even managed to scrounge up even the slightest indicia in support of the proposition that God doesn't exist. Every argument you guys have against the belief that God exists can basically be summed up as "lalalalalala! I'm not listening! lalalalala!", or "I don't want to believe it, so your evidence doesn't count/your argument is invalid".

I mean, even if the positive arguments and evidence for God's existence were as weak and scarce as you guys claim they are (which they aren't), they still beat the positive arguments and evidence for the non-existence of God by a mile, seeing as those simply don't exist.

It may help you to understand what God is from my perspective, and also what Christianity is. You hold a vision of God in your mind just like you can visualise any other object, real or imagined. God means something to you. To the extent that you experience God in the world you always superimpose you ideas about God on some real world event or place. Some commonplace strong emotion you will associate with the presence of God. This is very common and you see it in all religions.

Religions of ‘the book’ use the book and creeds to standardise ideas about the God. Different denominations of a given religion exist because the book is not technically adequate for this purpose; it lacks precision.

The God has no other feature apart from those coordinated ideas about God that believers hold to. They chant, mumble and sing their beliefs in order to stay together as a group, and, exclude other groups.

Christianity and some other religions are hazardous because the followers think that their coordinated beliefs are true in the sense that they are founded in reality and they go on to make poor decisions about real things because of that. They do not learn anything new because the book does not change. They worship an historical artefact long since past its ‘sell by’ date.

[Cow Poke]

I would appreciate answers to my questions. I'm trying to understand your point of view. Is voting for a rapist an immoral act? Is there any immoral thing a person could do that would prohibit you from voting for them?

Do you have a particular rapist in mind? OR is this just a dumb hypothetical?

[Cow Poke]

I think the trick is that one must repent first. And Roy Moore has yet to even acknowledge his wrongdoing let alone repent...unlike Al Franken who has not only recognised his wrongdoing but sincerely apologised.

You REALLY believe Al Franken sincerely apologized? He got caught with his pants down, so to speak, and has been a super hypocrite on this up to this point. His apology seems more calculated than sincere.

[Mountain Man]

Allred gets wishy-washy when asked if her client actually saw Roy Moore sign the yearbook.

Partial transcript from an interview she did on NBC:

Source: Breitbart

TUR: Does your client, Beverly Young Nelson, remember him signing it?

ALLRED: She remembers — well, she remembers being with him. It was on the counter. She alleges that he took it, that he signed it and she was thrilled that he had signed it, because, as far as she knew, he was a D.A. and that was an important position.

TUR: So she saw him sign it?

ALLRED: I don’t believe at the time she had a clue whether he was an assistant D.A. or a D.A., but he signed it, she took it. As far as she knows, I mean, there’s no reason for her to think it’s anybody’s but his signature.

TUR: But did she see him sign it?

ALLRED: You know, I don’t — I haven’t asked her if she saw him, but we did describe what happened that evening in question. What she alleges was that she put it on the counter; that I think she asked to sign — or that he did sign it. That’s all.

TUR: I ask this, because it seems you’re not 100% sure that it is his signature, and if you’re not 100% sure that it is his signature, why would you show it at a press conference?

ALLRED: Well, why would — you know, why does anybody doubt that it is his signature?

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/...sign-yearbook/

© Copyright Original Source

I swear, Allred is the real-life version of Lionel Hutz from The Simpsons.

[Cow Poke]

Allred gets wishy-washy when asked if her client actually saw Roy Moore sign the yearbook.

Partial transcript from an interview she did on NBC:

Source: Breitbart

TUR: Does your client, Beverly Young Nelson, remember him signing it?

ALLRED: She remembers — well, she remembers being with him. It was on the counter. She alleges that he took it, that he signed it and she was thrilled that he had signed it, because, as far as she knew, he was a D.A. and that was an important position.

TUR: So she saw him sign it?

ALLRED: I don’t believe at the time she had a clue whether he was an assistant D.A. or a D.A., but he signed it, she took it. As far as she knows, I mean, there’s no reason for her to think it’s anybody’s but his signature.

TUR: But did she see him sign it?

ALLRED: You know, I don’t — I haven’t asked her if she saw him, but we did describe what happened that evening in question. What she alleges was that she put it on the counter; that I think she asked to sign — or that he did sign it. That’s all.

TUR: I ask this, because it seems you’re not 100% sure that it is his signature, and if you’re not 100% sure that it is his signature, why would you show it at a press conference?

ALLRED: Well, why would — you know, why does anybody doubt that it is his signature?

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/...sign-yearbook/

© Copyright Original Source

I swear, Allred is the real-life version of Lionel Hutz from The Simpsons.

Yeah, why would anybody doubt it's his signature, just because we refuse to show it?

[Cow Poke]

Is voting for a rapist an immoral act? Is there any immoral thing a person could do that would prohibit you from voting for them?

I get it - you're feeling remorse for having voted for Bill Clinton, yes?