no propaganda please Loc: moon orbiting the third rock from the sun

HE SAID, SHE SAID
What Christians are missing in Roy Moore debate
Michael Brown: 'The ultimate issue for me is his integrity and honesty'

Dr. Michael Brown (www.askdrbrown.org) is the host of the nationally syndicated "Line of Fire" radio program. His latest book is "Saving a Sick America: A Prescription for Moral and Cultural T***sformation." Connect with him on Facebook or Twitter.
t

Earlier this week, I asked this poll question on Twitter: “If Roy Moore was running against Hillary Clinton for POTUS and you believed he was guilty of the 40-year-old, serious charges being brought against him, how would you v**e?”

In response, 39 percent said they would still v**e for Moore, 6 percent said they would v**e for Hillary, and 55 percent said they would not v**e at all. (A few others wrote that they’d v**e for a third-party candidate.)

Some were not happy with the question, tweeting, “Why are you asking this hypothetical question about Judge Moore? It causes the thought to form in people’s minds, even unconsciously, that he might be guilty. But he is plainly innocent and he needs to be vigorously defended by all who love the t***h.”

Another wrote, “Personally, I dislike the implied bias in the question. … so I’m not v****g.” And still another posted: “Roy Moore is a Christian brother. For the last 40 years Roy Moore has served Jesus Christ and the people of Alabama. Why do you cast obstacles and divisions? What appetite are you satisfying with your salacious questions?”

To be candid, I find such responses distressing.

These are real issues that need to be discussed, and the nation is watching to see how evangelical Christians respond to serious allegations against one of our own. Do we simply look the other way? Do we condemn the Harvey Weinsteins (and others on the left) based on witness testimony but question witness testimony when it comes against our side?

More importantly, if we believed Judge Moore to be guilty, would we v**e for him for the alleged greater good? As another follower tweeted, “Shall We Endorse Evil That Good May Result?”

To reiterate my own position yet again, I hope Judge Moore is innocent, and I would love to see him serve in the Senate. And I have prayed (and do pray) that the t***h will come to light before the e******ns, wh**ever the t***h might be.

In fact, because I’ve said we need to evaluate the evidence fairly, I was blasted by one Christian woman who wrote: “Dr. Brown, you are the reason women don’t come forward when they’re sexually assaulted. One of the primary reasons they don’t is they won’t be believed. It’s men like you that help to keep women silent. This is why women are thankful for compassionate, unbiased, Christlike leaders who believe Leigh Corfman and Beverly Nelson. …” (For the record, Christian women, including a number who were molested and raped, told me overwhelmingly that they differed with this woman’s assessment. (For a relevant video, go here.)

One man wrote: “Is Dr. Brown the chaplain for right-wing media? He sure acts like it! Is there anything they push that Dr. Brown doesn’t repeat?” Another opined, “Dr. Brown is appearing more and more to be a hireling.” And still another wrote (this man clearly a liberal): “Shame on you, you cowardly old crackpot. History will be your judge. And there’s good reason for you to be very uneasy about that.”

These attacks were the result of my calling on Gloria Allred to release Beverly Young Nelson’s yearbook for forensic analysis. So, if anything, I could be criticized for not immediately believing his accusers rather than criticized for casting “obstacles and divisions” or making people think that “he might be guilty.” I truly do not know who to believe at this point as I weigh the evidence before God.

The reality, though, is that I’m asking an important ethical question: If you knew that a staunchly evangelical candidate was guilty of trying to force himself on girls as young as 14 when he was in his 30s and was lying about it today, would you still v**e for that person if it was for the alleged greater good?

It would be one thing if this were part of Judge Moore’s public record (and again, I hope the charges are not true) and, when these issues were brought to light again, he said: “Yes, I had a serious moral issue in my life at that time. But with God’s help and with the help of local ministers, I dealt with that issue and have been sexually chaste ever since. My record speaks for itself.”

It would be one thing if everything had been worked out with the families involved 40 years ago and someone rediscovered these incidents today. (Once more, I’m not presuming guilt; I’m simply presenting scenarios.)

If that were the case, we could say: “We’ve all blown it one way or another in the past. And even if his t***sgressions were more serious than others, he dealt with them, all parties involved were satisfied, and he has had an exemplary track record until today. Why shouldn’t I v**e for him?”

Things would even be different if he immediately confessed when the charges came forward and said: “Yes, this is all true, and I’m embarrassed by what happened. But no charges were ever pressed, I made peace with God and man and deeply repented of my actions. And as you can see, no such charges have been brought against me within the last 40 years. My life has been squeaky clean.”

Again, we could choose to forgive the past and v**e for the man based on his 40-year track record.

But this is not the case. Either the charges are false, or is he lying about them to this day, meaning his very Christian witness must be questioned.

This is the essential point I feel many evangelicals are missing. And while I would consider v****g for someone who confessed to such misdeeds from more than four decades ago if they demonstrated a changed life ever since, I would not v**e for a lying hypocrite.

So, if I were living in Alabama today and nothing definitive came out before the e******ns, I would either believe Judge Moore and v**e for him or else I would believe his accusers and not v**e at all. The ultimate issue for me is his integrity and honesty today, since his whole campaign is based on his strong Christian witness and strong Christian stand.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brown has a good point worth your serious thought and responses.

JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida

If I was convinced he forced himself on fourteen year old girls I would never v**e for him. P********a is incurable. If after his proven t***sgressions Moore became a born again Christian. I would forgive him but not v**e for him. Some things cannot be overlooked. Having given this hypothetical finding (guilty) I believe he is innocent as far as evidence goes that I've seen. The 14 year old story has way to many holes.

Gatsby

Now that was really a "loaded question":

“If Roy Moore was running against Hillary Clinton for POTUS and you believed he was guilty of the 40-year-old, serious charges being brought against him, how would you v**e?”

The question should have been; if you believed BOTH were guilty of all of the serious charges brought against them,

how would you v**e?

padremike Loc: Phenix City, Al

Then there is the story behind psalm 51.

JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida

Great story. Shows the mercy of the lord for those truly repentant.

LAPhil Loc: Los Angeles, CA

I think the bottom line for me would be, as you covered in your post, whether Moore admitted the charges were true or continued to deny them, as he has. If the charges are true, which I believe they are, his denial only makes it worse, and I could never v**e for him under those circumstances. On the other hand, if he came clean and admitted everything he did was wrong and he saw the error of his ways and turned his life around 30 or so years ago, that would be a different story.

JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida

I don't believe the story about the fourteen year old has any validity to it. Here's why. P*******es don't change their stripes. Seems a person,
especially a powerful person would not change and would probably have many more accusers. The legal age of consent, where the accuser said he was thirty something and they were seventeen or eighteen seems creepy to me but not illegal. However; he denies this also. No pass if he's caught lying.

EmilyStrode

There are other issues just as pressing: Moore twice defied the laws of this nation, violating the separation of Church and state. The separation of church and state protects Christians, it does not harness or oppress them, though for many it seems that way. If he were Muslim and had defied the laws of this nation in keeping with his faith, would you support that religious freedom? That Moore acted, if you will, in good faith not to remove the Ten Commandments from a public courthouse or approve gay marriage, if a Muslim had refused to remove Sharia Law from a government place and supported "honor k*****gs," would you see him acting in good faith?

If it were factual--proven--that Moore had these sexual t***sgressions and did not confess those wrong-doings, look for forgiveness or attempt to make amends, then I would not v**e for him--no matter what the consequences. So much cruelty and misery throughout history and today by people who believe the ends justifies the means; such is an evil delusion. Yet it has not been proven and Moore continues to deny it. So the question is not about whether I believe the women or Moore but on innocent until proven guilty. Make your choice on the issues.

LAPhil Loc: Los Angeles, CA

Glad you brought up that other perspective.

Kevyn

Write, call and email Moore and do the same to media outlets across Alabama. Moore can bring the entire thing to closure in one hour. All he needs to do is demand a polygraph exam done by an independent agency. The only question any journalist should ask Moore is; are you willing to settle this by submitting to a polygraph?

JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida

Polygraph's unfortunately are not 100% reliable.

JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida

Exactly why I preferred Strange. I may agree with Moore ideologically but we are not a nation ruled by religious dogma.

LAPhil Loc: Los Angeles, CA

Not 100%, but close enough for me. Remember, we're not dealing with a criminal trial here. I'd like to see more people take polygraphs in cases like this so we wouldn't have to keep wondering who's telling the t***h forever and ever. I realize it's not a perfect solution, but at least we'd have a much better idea of the t***h, even if just by knowing who was willing to take the test and who wasn't.

Kevyn

If you or I were in Moore’s shoes and were innocent we would be chomping at the bit for an opportunity to take a polygraph.

no propaganda please Loc: moon orbiting the third rock from the sun

Please state the exact lines that you claim indicate separation of church and state. Is it in the body of the Constitution or in an amendment? If so, which one and how exactly is it worded? After trying to find it for several hours perhaps you will finally admit that IT IS NOT ANYWHERE IN THE CONSTITUTION.