Monday, November 13, 2017

PCG on Roy Moore

According to a recent report by The Washington Post has recently reported that the Republican Party's senatorial candidate for Alabama, Roy Moore, initiated a sexual encounter with a 14 year old girl named Leigh Corfman back in 1979. It was also reported that around this time Moore dated three teenagers even though he was in his thirties at the time. One former work colleague, Teresa Jones, has since stated to CNN that it "was common knowledge that [he] dated high school girls, everyone we knew thought it was weird."

In times past he had gained attention after getting into contention with federal judges regarding his placement of the Ten Commandments in Alabama's court house. His contention with federal judges was mentioned twice by PCG's Dennis Leap.
In late August [2003], many news outlets ran a story about the controversy surrounding a 5,300-pound granite monument of the Ten Commandments in the Alabama state judicial building. The monument, which had been placed there by State Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore two years earlier, included excerpts from the Declaration of Independence and other historic documents, as well as quotations from James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, George Washington and other leaders. It featured our national motto: In God We Trust
The storm over the monument began when three attorneys, backed by the Southern Poverty Law Center, the American Civil Liberties Union and Americans United for Separation of Church and State, filed a lawsuit against Judge Moore for unlawfully crossing a constitutional line separating church and state by imposing his own brand of Christianity on the state of Alabama. When Moore placed the monument in the judicial building, he said it depicted “the moral foundations of law” and reflected the “sovereignty of God over the affairs of men.” Moore has been battling to keep it in place since U.S. District Court Judge Myron Thompson ordered it removed in November 2002. Justice Moore has lost that battle. The monument was moved. ... 
Judge Moore appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, and his case was flatly refused—meaning Judge Thompson’s ruling stands. The Supreme Court obviously agrees that our nation cannot acknowledge God! This same Supreme Court said in June of this year that sodomy is a constitutional right. Think about this. For refusing to comply with the court’s order to remove the monument, Judge Moore has been suspended as a judge because of his so-called criminal activities—and yet, sodomy is now a right? What is going on? (Dennis Leap, America’s Judicial Blackout, November 2003.)
In the latter half of 2003, a lot of publicity was devoted to the furor over Judge Roy Moore’s placement of a huge chunk of granite displaying the Ten Commandments in the Alabama state courthouse. Opposing him were judges, lawyers and leaders of atheist groups. Supporting him were well-known heads of Christian groups. There were marches to get the granite rock out of the state house. There were prayer meetings and candlelight vigils to keep it in public view. The setting was very revealing about how our Western world views the Ten Commandments and God. 
Christopher Hitchens, Oxford graduate and prolific political journalist, wrote this in an article titled “Moore’s Law: The Immorality of the Ten Commandments”: “Judge Roy Moore is clearly, as well as a fool and a publicity hound, a man who identifies the Mount Sinai orders to Moses with a certain interpretation of Protestantism. ...” The article continues in such a similar reproachful manner for all the commandments. It is not our intention to fingerpoint here, but the author obviously holds a hatred of God and established religion. (Dennis Leap, Keys to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness, February 2004.)
(The passage above was later included in Dennis Leap's booklet, The Ten Commandments, which was first published in 2005.)

Recently PCG has mentioned Moore in twice in their writings. Once after he gained the Republican nomination to run for a seat in the Senate.
Stephen Flurry discusses the repercussions of the German elections and the coalition that German Chancellor Angela Merkel may not be able to form. Also on today’s program: Israel’s worry over the rise of the far right in Germany, Roy Moore’s Senate victory in Alabama, and what inequality and injustice looks like from a global perspective. (September 27, 2017.)
He is mentioned again in a brief mention of the frightening allegations.
Today’s sexual harassment revelations and accusations have been aimed at ... Republican Senate nominee Roy Moore, who allegedly pursued relationships with teenage girls when he was in his 30s, nearly four decades ago. (Joel Hilliker, Sex Scandals: A Glaring Lesson People Are Missing, November 10, 2017.)
He who wishes to a senator for Alabama portrayed himself as being so devoted to God and yet he is said to have behaved in a sexual manner with an underage, 14 year old girl.


  1. Great disection of the hypocrisy.

    Of all 25 states he could have chosen for marrying girls of any state and New Hampshire having a minimum age of 13, this guy chooses Alabama. What a fool.

    To have monuments of Moses or Hammurabi in court is a great thing and attesting to knowledge of the history and traditions of law.

    However as the Oxford scholar said. To interpret Law according to a limited interpretation of a subset of puritan reading of ancient texts like the bible is both unconstitutional, a betrayal of the age of enlightenment, a misreading of the founding fathers and in the whole, intelectual dishonesty and a lack of understanding what the USA is about or what freedom of though entails.


    1. nck says "Of all 25 states he could have chosen for marrying girls of any state and New Hampshire having a minimum age of 13, this guy chooses Alabama. What a fool."

      How about unethical nck? Interesting way you expressed your thoughts about little girls. You didn't condemn the behavior, you responded in such a way as this guy should have shopped around in another state.

  2. "any age" I meant. Not any age.

    For those being shocked. Of course I am just making fun about the ages thing.

    Different times, different norms. The average Neanderthal chick would have been 13 for initiation rites I guess.

    On an intellectual level I am appalled at the level of knowledge about the workings of the American republic in order for the puritans to live free amongst others. E pluribus unum.


  3. Opinionated.

    Yes I did express my legal opinion in that way. As I would express it about the use of marihuana. It is extremely foolish for a lawyer to engage in illegal behaviour apart from the ethical side.

    Ok what is ethical? In the other posting below you can see I am having a little fun on some of the sources of ethical behaviour.

    As I said. In times when the average age for a woman to die at 28 I guess 15 was not considered unethical for an emmpress to marry. Today of course we have the benefits of psycological research that has installed the ethics that a later age and an education might be a better option for a woman to pursue.

    In light of the real worldwide problems of women and (fe)male slavery and traficking I stand corrected by you as iron sharpens iron.

    Now if there were "rape" charges I would not even have considered having a little fun on puritan norms.


  4. To explain further opinionated. I stand corrected in light of broader context of female opression.

    Having said that. "The people" will decide on the ethics. Like "the people" got to decide" in the OJ Simpson case. "Le contrat social" // Rousseau etc.


  5. Don't change the subject. You have problems hombre and you know it. Looks like besides being an apologist for hwa, you share a similar perversion with him.

  6. Ah ok. On the regular twisting my words tour again.
    Discussion closed!


  7. No the discussion is not closed. You have not condemned the behavior of people with sex problems with children.

  8. OK!

    Here we go!

    1) the actual discussion is about judge moore engaging 14-17 year olds while in his thirties. I have a problem with the puritan approach in this matter

    I guess you would violate the prime directive while engaging an amazonian tribe.

    2) the legal reasoning regarding hwa is ridiculous

    3) Just a minute ago I was listening to a person monitoring 350 pedophiles who regularly take Asian sex holidays. His story prompted me to come back to this blog and indeed condemn fully and completely these predatory persons.

    Now then this monitor started telling me that one of the means he is tracking these people is through creditcard companies who are in breach of privacy legislation.

    Now this is a real time question I am faced with. Help these heroic monitoring people or UPHOLD THE LAW. I must uphold the law. I condemn human traficking and the abuse of children.


  9. I get the feeling that the moral high ground takes a backseat to what is expedient to your views.

  10. Yes sir!

    That is not a feeling.

    That is the reality of the legal system and our society where we have made a contract ( le contrat social (rousseau) to live in a society with people with differing opinions. And where the laws are not derived from ancient texts but from people engaging in a democratic process.

    It is true. I might not like the outcome of that process at times.

    It is called the rule of law.

    This can be treated as separate from any system of morality although I prefer certain systems of morality to others.


  11. "This can be treated as separate from any system of morality although I prefer certain systems of morality to others."

    Explain yourself.


    Citizens in democracies are willing to obey the laws of their society, then, because they are submitting to their own rules and regulations. Justice is best achieved when the laws are established by the very people who must obey them.

    A muslim president of the USA or a Catholic, or a Mormon runner up should be in the realm of possibility.

    As a matter of fact the mayor of London is Sadiq Khan. I don't care. As long as he rules according to the principles as laid out in the law.

    I am pretty sure Thomas Jefferson produced literature explaining it better than I do.


  13. You didn't answer the question. Incapable?

  14. I prefer living in a secular society than in the Kingdom of Vatican city. Or any theocracy.

    If that answers your question.



  16. Again. From my post above
    >"This can be treated as separate from any system of morality although I prefer certain systems of morality to others."

    Explain yourself.<

  17. Ah. I thought my quoting of Kant and Jefferson did the trick.

    I have no problem if one would find me amoral. Some might find that immoral. But that would not be my conclusion.

    I think the founders of the American republic were freemasons. Very nice to remember the Puritans and acknowledge their contribution but they had their problems.

    Just the other day I was reading a shipscaptain journal about a visit to the Puritan colony. They had wipped a couple for having engaged in premarital "relations" while engaged to be married.

    The 17th century shipscaptain noted in his journal that these people had been "wholly unpractical" in the handling of this situation. I would second that, while some bible thumper might find cause for the treatment of that couple.


  18. While I am at it I might aswell hand you some free financial advice aswell.

    Don't fall in love with any stocks you might hold. Buy and sell impartial and based on the facts and numbers alone. Not because you like the company for whatever other reason.


  19. "Don't fall in love with any stocks you might hold. Buy and sell impartial and based on the facts and numbers alone. Not because you like the company for whatever other reason."

    Sound reasoning by a guy who projects himself as a moron.

  20. Hm yes,

    Perhaps some might classify me as a wholesaler in "unknown unknowns."

    From Wikipedia:

    "Known unknowns result from phenomena which are recognized, but poorly understood. On the other hand, unknown unknowns are phenomena which cannot be expected because there has been no prior experience or theoretical basis for expecting the phenomena."

    "Although the language may be tortured, the basic point is both valid and important."

    Psychoanalytic philosopher Slavoj Žižek says that beyond these three categories there is a fourth, the unknown known, that which we intentionally refuse to acknowledge that we know: "If Rumsfeld thinks that the main dangers in the confrontation with Iraq were the 'unknown unknowns', that is, the threats from Saddam whose nature we cannot even suspect, then the Abu Ghraib scandal shows that the main dangers lie in the "unknown knowns"—

    the disavowed beliefs, suppositions and obscene practices we pretend not to know about, even though they form the background of our public values."

    The term “known unknowns” has been applied to the identification of chemical substances using analytical chemistry approaches, specifically mass spectrometry. In many cases, an unknown to an investigator that is detected in an experiment is actually known in the chemical literature, a reference database, or an internet resource. These types of compounds are termed “known unknowns.” The term was originally coined by Little et al.[17] and reported a number of times in the literature since then as a general approach


  21. I was just quoting a certain public figure. Non of this is 'my crap". Just the first time someone asked about the unknown unknowns.


  22. I sense the presence of a nictitating membrane.


  23. I feel bad for having expressed certain issues in the (jocular) manner I did.

    Many difficult topics are associated with judge Moore and I pray the people of Alabama make the right decision.

    For instance how do we judge behaviour that was deemed "strange" (by his accusers)" 40 years ago but "criminal" today.

    If any good comes out of the #metoo movement it is my hope the discussion will look deeper into the mechanisms that lead to these misdeeds and ask the right questions about those mechanisms. How is it that some people remain silent for many years instead of act immediately. Society in the end should ask deeper questions than only pursueing a sensational course of "naming and shaming" and simply dividing people in categories like "victims" and "perpetrators", "men, women".

    This must not stop as just one of the next hypes, only costing us a 7th season of House of Cards. Perhaps this moment is transformational.

    It is a good thing that (past) abusive alpha male behavior is exposed and people are debating the structures of power.

    Perhaps a comforting thought and momentuous moment for progress of civilisation if we (the people) are able to debate the issue in the open even if some of it looks superficial, hypocritical or politically motivated. We can pursue by asking the right questions.

    I must not be an impediment to that discussion. (100 lines with chalk on chalkboard)


    1. The thing is, it's deeper, and has and had applications amongst our former cult. Probably scads of women who could report sexual abuse from their Armstrongite pastors exist. We already know about GTA's victims, and I suspect that he was just the lightning rod for the movement. We should probably check the G-II log for trips to Thailand. There have always been rumors.

      Hopefully, this ME TOO thing represents a higher level of education, a purging of our society.
      Any society is judged by how it treats its weak and powerless. Surely we can do better.