Defenses of Roy Moore

People have really been coming up with lots of creative ways to defend utter scumbag Roy Moore against charges that he assaulted a 14-year-old girl and was constantly hitting on other high school girls when he was in his thirties.


There's the Biblical defense.

Alabama state official defends Roy Moore, citing Joseph and Mary: ‘They became parents of Jesus’

Actually, if you knew the first thing about the Gospel, you'd know that Joseph was NOT the father of Jesus.

He was Jesus' stepfather. If you're gonna be a Bible-thumper, you at least should have that basic bit of knowledge about the book you're thumping.

Also, yes. It was common for teen girls to be married off to grown men back in Bible times. Since women were seen mainly as fetus incubators, you wanted to marry one with as many fertile years left as possible. And since the husband's main responsibility was to provide monetarily, you would want to marry a man who had established himself in his career . No one wants to marry a broke-ass apprentice/
At any rate, what went on in the First Century is probably not really relevant to today's world. But nice try, though.


Oh, wait. there's more Bible defense?

“Take the Bible. Zachariah and Elizabeth for instance. Zachariah was extremely old to marry Elizabeth and they became the parents of John the Baptist,” Ziegler said

Okay, I don't know where you're getting that idea. As far as I can find, the story of Elizabeth and Zechariah only appears in the Book of Luke (as well as some non-canonical books) Here is what is said about their ages:

⁵ There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth. . .

⁷ And they had no child, because that Elisabeth was barren, and they both were now well stricken in years. . .

¹⁸ And Zacharias said unto the angel, Whereby shall I know this? for I am an old man, and my wife well stricken in years.

So, that's it. They were both old. That's all the information we have as to their ages. Nowhere does it say "and then Zacharias said unto the Lord 'I am an old man, but check out my hot, young wife!'"

Anyway, there are bound to be better defenses than the Bible.

There's the "well, in some countries. . ." defense.




And the lawyer also used the "hey, my wife was only 21 when we started dating" defense.


There's the "technically, this wasn't illegal" defense.

Breitbart editor: The '16-year-old and the 18-year-old have no business' in Roy Moore sexual misconduct story

“The 16-year-old and the 18-year-old have no business in that story because those are women of legal age of consent,” Breitbart editor-at-large Joel Pollak said on MSNBC.

Yes, thanks to Alabama's super-creepy age of consent laws, a 16-year-old girl was technically a legal adult. And we all know that as long as something is not illegal, it's not immoral enough to warrant a removal from office. I mean, it's not like he had a consensual affair with a 21-year-old intern, am I right? Now THAT's an impeachable offense!

Also, not to quibble, but whether a 16-year-old girl is "legal" or not, it is still sexual assault to do what she says Moore did.

Nelson said Moore groped her and tried to force her head onto his crotch. Nelson says she yelled and tried to leave the car, but Moore locked the door. "I was not going to allow him to force me to have sex with him," Nelson said. "I was terrified. I thought he was going to rape me.

If she was 16 or 26 or 106, that is a crime. That is a sexual assault. That should earn you jail time, not a Senate seat.

Aslo, you say the 16 and 18-year-olds were "legal." What about the 14-year-old?
And "shut up, that's what" is not a good enough answer.


Oh, and then Pollak pivots to the "I don't understand what words mean" defense:

“If this story is true, and I think that any story about sexual misconduct, especially with someone who is underage, is very serious — why would the Washington Post wrap it with all kinds of perfectly legitimate relationships as well as all kinds of other political clutter?” Pollak asked. “You said yourself at the start of the segment that he’s being accused of relationships with teenagers. Now, to me, that’s not accurate."

Yes, totally inaccurate to refer to "teenagers" when the girls you're talking about are sixTEEN, sevenTEEN, and eighTEEN  years old.

Of course, there's the tried-and-true Blame The Victim defense. Hey, it's a classic for a reason, right?

The original Tweet has been taken down, but some asshat named Jim Jennings (@jjenningsusa) Tweeted this gem:

"Some 14 year old girls are IMPOSSIBLY flirtatious and sophisticated."

A different twist on the victim-blaming defense comes from GOP County Chairman Riley Seiberhener:

Alabama Geneva County GOP chairman Riley Seibenhener, who called me back, says he doesn't believe the allegations are true, but if they're true he won't support him - but, at the same time, it's not "forcible rape."

"I know that 14-year-olds don't make good decisions," he adds.

— Daniel Dale (@ddale8) November 10, 2017

 — Daniel Dale (@ddale8) November 10, 2017


 14-year-olds don't make good decisions. Like it would have been a much smarter decision to have NOT been molested by a 32-year-old attorney.
Also, the 32-year-old lawyer could have decided to NOT engage in sexual activity with a high school freshman, but I guess no one expects him to make good decisions.


And taking victim-blaming one step further into the sewer, Alabama State Rep. Ed Henry goes with  "threatening to prosecute the victims"

“If they believe this man is predatory, they are guilty of allowing him to exist for 40 years. I think someone should prosecute and go after them. You can’t be a victim 40 years later, in my opinion,” Henry said.

See, it's the girls' fault for letting the grown man get away with it for all these years. Oh, it's so simple! I see it all now! Obviously, we can't expect a young district attorney of 32 to be responsible for his own actions. It's the powerless high school girls who have the responsibility to take him down.  Because obviously everyone would have totally believed them and not tried to put the blame on them, and. . . well not in 2017, obviously, but in the 1970's people were much more "woke" about these things.

Anyway, there are the usual "she's lying" defenses.Along with the  "oh, and so is she. And her. Yep, her too!"
There's the "but it was so long ago" defense.
There's the "political witch hunt" defense.
All the usual bullshit. I can't even look at any more of this.


Judge Moore -
You're guilty.
You know you're guilty.
Just drop out of the race. Stop lying and stop letting/encouraging other people to lie on your behalf. You're old, just retire. Just go away.
You're guilty.
Have some sense of shame.