First, there is doubt about most of his accusers, for which the most that can be said is that Moore's behavior indicates a somewhat immature man for age 30. What does a 30 year old man talk about with an unworldly juvenile child? And yet some May-December romances have been truly loving. I don't mean here to defend Judge Moore, but to say that most of these accusations have to be looked at with a high degree of skepticism. And whenever Gloria Allred gets involved, my bullshit meter pegs out. Why lie if what you are trying to sell is the truth?
Second, is there any doubt that Doug Jones will act to obstruct Trump's agenda? Is not the Trump agenda also our agenda in many cases? Has not Trump so far kept many of his campaign promises to conservatives? Trump was not my first choice, any more that Moore would have been had I been an Alabamian, but I believe in voting for the most conservative candidate that can win, and that came down to Roy Moore.
Third, whatvever Moore lacks in savvy messaging, the fundamental fact is he is often correct on principle. Placing the 10 Commandments in the court house established no religion, but did indicated the philosophical foundations of American law. The gay agenda to have everyone acknowledge gayness as being somehow acceptable is wrong headed. A gay couple will never be able to reproduce itself, thus ensuring that gays remain a tiny percentage of the population. It is also morally wrong. To state the obvious here does not indicate that you must actively discriminate against gays, nor does it indicate hatred of gays.
But let’s be honest about the claim that the non-Left somehow dodged the bullet when a liberal Democrat was elected to the U.S. Senate in what had been a deep Red State. Does anyone in his right mind believe that Jones will not act as Trump said he would, as a tool of Chuck Schumer and those leftist constituencies that helped put him in office? And what about the laughable prediction made by Bret Baier and various Fox-Allstars that Jones would be a “centrist Democrat” in the tradition of West Virginia’s Joe Manchin and North Dakota’s Heidi Heitkamp. Haven’t those who predicted this bothered to notice that their “centrist Democrats” have voted on every key issue against the President, on the side of Chuck Schumer?
Am I supposed to believe, moreover, that the attacks on Republicans by the Democrats as sexual predators will now stop because, according to National Review, we had a “conservative victory” in the Alabama election? The day after Moore was defeated, that longtime lackey of a highly probable sexual predator Bill Clinton, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, demanded that Trump resign, on the grounds that he harassed multiple women before he became president. Please note that Senator Gillibrand belongs to a self-described “feminist” party that has been led by such notorious womanizers and possible rapists as the “Lion of the Senate” Ted Kennedy and Bill Clinton. Further, the Democratic Party abounds in office-holders who have benefited from the largess of perhaps the most notorious sexual predator in Hollywood, Harvey Weinstein.....snip...
Of course, I doubt that the attacks unleashed on Moore by Republicans, like Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and the editors of National Review and Weekly Standard, were entirely about Moore’s behavior forty years ago. The fact is he’s just too conservative on social issues to please those who would like to change certain conversations. Roy Moore is not at all happy with gay marriage and as a judge refused to issue marriage licenses to gay couples, as David French reminds us in a fit of outrage, in violation of the Supreme Court’s Obergefell v Hodges Decision. If memory serves, I recall the support from conservative Republicans last year that went to Kentucky Justice of the Peace Kim Davis when she refused to issue licenses for gay marriages. At the time Ted Cruz, Mike Huckabee and other Republican politicians hurried to Davis’s defense, as a Christian exercising her religious freedom. Why is the failure of Judge Moore to recognize what he sees as a bizarre and sinful travesty on traditional marriage a danger to constitutional government, which is what French contends it is? That Moore refuses to go along with a Supreme Court ruling that he and I (and lots of other Americans) found to be absurd and against his religious conscience would hardly make him a menace in the U.S. Senate. Would French, who wears his antiracism on his sleeve, have accepted the Dred Scott decision in 1857, which denied that slaves who were brought into non-slave states became free because of their relocation?As a Christian who is a member of a congregation of the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod, I have been reading the Hallmarks of Lutheran Identity by Alvin J. Schmidt. One of the chapters in this book discusses Luther's theology of the two kingdoms. The one kingdom is the Kingdom of Grace. This is the Kingdom of God in which, as the Prophet writes:
And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.But that is not the kingdom we living in today. Luther recognizes that the Kingdom of the world is thoroughly sinful and depraved. No act of man (or woman) should shock us, because we are by nature sinful creatures who, but for God's grace, would be condemned to the pit. In this world, sometimes we must choose the least bad as better than the worst. We can not always have our pure principles, any more than we can have our pure doctrine. Sometimes we must fight, and while we have a fighter in the White House, it seems like a good time to do just that. Saving our country for our children seems like a good idea, don't you think?