Roy Moore, Republican Senate Nominee, Accused of Inappropriate Encounter With Underage Girl

It was NOT common in the 70s for high school children to be married.

Median age of marriage 1979.....men 24.4 and women 22.1

Yeah kod...........not high school age.

1. Laws say marijuana is wrong. How does society feel about it? Laws for military still say cheating on your spouse in a crime, how does society feel about that? Unless you can apply this across the board, then don't try to apply it here. You cant pick and choose that rationale.

2. What the **** are you talking about? The civil rights movement was about rights, they didnt nit pick over words used aside from "nigger". You're really full of shit today buddy, i suggest going back to bed and trying again.

@kod: I'm talking about the law here. Stop equivocating.

Sure, I just wanted to add that the issue was unwanted sexual advances too since I read your post and it seemed you were unaware that it was unwanted.

In terms of your argument, I understand the rationale but even in 1979 it doesn't seem like children were being married off at that age.

In fact, the lowest median age of first marriage since the early 1700s was had by the baby boom generation, where the age dropped to 20.5 years in 1950.

http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2014/02/teen-girls-stop-commonly-getting-married/

Whatever the exact number is, you're doing your best to miss the point. You are actually attempting to avoid the reality of what is being said to you.

Lets not turn this into a subjective debate on the ethics and morality of a 32 year old having sexual relations with a 14 year old.

It is a crime. End of discussion

https://www.thespruce.com/estimated-median-age-marriage-2303878

Not that this has ANYTHING to do with marriage but clearly the ages were not as young as you make this out to be.

What is important here is she was below the age of consent.

It was unwanted sexual advances which are illegal regardless of age.

Indeed. For some reason kod........and only kod........is defending the indefensible.

When we have 20,000 cases a year in the states and thats been a dropping number since we started counting (with an increased population now) it definitely says it was far more common. And all you have to do is speak to someone over the age of 50. This didnt come out of no where for me, in fact i changed my views on how to handle situations like this because on a few topics i tried doing the same thing, and then got owned by some elders i know on how things were so much different back then. And you know what happened when i brought this up (neighborhood bingo... yes i play bingo with seniors)? Thats what they said. The data, seems to match what they have said, so ill go with it.

Of course if you were capable of reading you'd know i never attempted this.

Sure you are or you wouldn't be arguing with everyone with your ridiculous attempts to paint 1979 as some ancient time wherein people married younger. Funny how several people in this thread came to the same conclusion reading your posts.

Perhaps your prose is the problem.

Again, this is not an attempt to debate the "ethics" or "morality" of it. Merely to point out that society had different views back then and to judge this person so harshly is to do so by today's standards. This is why i kept trying to give you analogies, but those are often lost on you.

Do you really want to know my moral or ethical stance on it? I dont think sex falls into moral or ethical standards unless its rape or pedophilia. Its not rape and its not pedophilia.

And once again I'm telling you that society said 14 was too young. Period. Hence why the law says 16. Also it's sexual assault....both then and now. So stop with the excuses.

And now with your last paragraph I hope people see why I said you defend the indefensible. Right there you say sexual assault is okay as long as it's not with prepubescent children nor actual rape.

Disgusting.

I don´t need any evidence to prove he is innocent. I hate to repeat myself but you are innocent until proven guilty not reverse.

And please do in the Clinton thread and not here , quote me on those things i have said that is proven wrong. You know factual wrong not "wrong" because your side is a saint and you believe that.

No, no, no. You were the one who decided to bring up the difference between how society felt versus the law. The law said 14 was too young, society seemed to say something different. Not only have we established that even today there is a surprisingly high number of people in society who feels this is acceptable, but we've also established that this has been a decreasing number.

I just fucking said i felt the only moral or ethics with sex is rape and pedophilia, RAPE meaning forced sex or sexual acts... sexual assault, tends to fall in that category. Its the unwanted physical contact that makes it unethical/immoral. And what exactly are we talking about here? Because you've been saying unwanted sexual advances, not sexual assault... these are two very different things.

@Jacanuk:

This is not a court of law. Why do you pretend it is?

This is a discussion about a senator that has been accused of being a sexual predator and it's okay to say that's disgusting. It's okay as individuals to find this behavior a reason not to elect him.

Having that ideology of not inferring guilt while on a jury and listening to evidence and reaching a conclusion is fine.

Always forming an opinion that the accuser is lying is not fine.

Did you post the same article as you claim now? because no where in that story does they state they have 30 sources backing this women up. And no other media reports that, they all report the fact that she is alone and the only one backing her a bit is her mom.

So please do link to those 30 sources who all credible backs her side up.

Also i think you are forgetting that most of Hollywood are liberals and they have all either confirmed it or have been met with credible proof. so don´t make this into a partisan issue. The only fact here is that a few weeks before the special election, this suddenly comes up from a source who is not known for their fact checking abilities and where they have been proven wrong by other media outlets.

If it's not partisan why do you defend Republicans but condemn Democrats?

Which democrat have been accused of the same?

And i would argue the same if this had been a democrat accused of this a short time before a special election with the same amount of "evidence". Not to mention before CK admitted it himself, i said the same thing about his situation. And last i checked CK is a liberal.

@Jacanuk said:

http://variety.com/2017/politics/news/roy-moore-alabama-senate-candidate-sexual-allegations-1202612364/

A number of other Republicans, including Senate Majority Mitch McConnell and Vice President Mike Pence, have said the same. Others, like Sen. John McCain (R-Arizona) and Mitt Romney, have said he should exit the race immediately, apparently confident of the veracity of the Post story. The writers cited 30 sources in their report.

Fox, CNN, and other channels have also stated specifically 30 sources for that story (On TV). Btw, It was not just the mothers, it was also friends and records.

I think you need to read what is being said.

The Post's report was based on interviews with 30 people. None of the four women approached the newspaper, the Post says; reporters reached out to them after hearing rumors about Moore's behavior in the '70s and '80s.

Even the post says they interviewed 30 people in total, not that 30 independently all backed this women up. They talked with 30 people out of those 4 came forward , 3 of which were all legal and 1 who claims that she at 14 had some encounter.

So nice try but right now this smells rotten and seems to be a character assassination on a possible republican senator who does not crumble like the 3 "moderates"

That was your own goal post move. I've always just stated the WaPo article has 30 sources. I never compartmentalized them.

You thought I was lying, you ended up wrong. As usual.

@Jacanuk: I think you need a reread.

You are lying , they don't have 30 sources , they have 4 where 3 is legal and nothing to come after but is used to create a basis for the 4th.

It's kinda sad that you twist facts like this but i am not surprised , it´s your normal m.o.

LOL and WOW. You just quoted about about 30 sources and now you say no. Are you feeling okay?

This is incorrect. These are defined as 30 sources for that article.

Try to read what it actual says. They interviewed 30 people who knew moore , not that they interviewed 30 people who confirmed this womans story.

Also you really think if 30 people all said the same thing Moore would still be in the election.

So does the article have 30 sources or not? This was the initial claim you denied.

Did the post interview 30 people , yes.

Did the 30 people back up Corfman in her story. No.

So spin it all you want, but the facts are there. There are no evidence but the woman herself over something that happened almost 40 years ago.

Link?

So you were wrong. Good to know.

Stop cutting my posts to fit your narrative, it´s getting annoying.

Huh,

You were saying?

@zaryia: Again there is one single source as to the woman who claimed of the encounter when she was 14.

How Moore was with 16-17-18-19 year olds is beside the point since the age of consent is 16.

So stop trying to spin this to fit your idea that he is guilty.

@Jacanuk

I'm telling you the WaPo article has 30 sources, which is an objective fact. You denied this fact, thus you were wrong and lost. As such, nothing indicates the WaPo article is a smear or completely false.

You are defending an alleged sexual predator due to your party affiliation. Based off of nothing. It's sickening.

No you are misrepresentation the facts.

For someone who does not bother actually looking into the story, what you are saying sounds like there are 30 people accusing Moore of having some sort of relationship with a 14 year old girl, you even point it out when you claim he is guilty.

And come on you know this, so stop trying to act like this spin comes as a surprise.

Hmmmm...jacanuk padding his post count again. LOL

I never stated that. I also never stated he was 100% guilty. Hence "allegations".

The only spin is anyone trying to say WaPo is doing a smear campaign and this is all fictional with absolutely nothing to back up such wild claims.

That puts me in the middle. Not calling the man 100% Guilty, also not stating WaPo is false. You, Hannity, Bannon would be the far right in this situation - smearing these women for your team.

Yes, you did indeed state that and you even begun using the pedo word to make sure you got the maximum effect.

And right now it does seem like Washout post is attempting to put a wrench in the republican wheel in Alabama, as the pundits even said on CNN, if this was any other media outlet or a DA they would never have gone any where with it, because it´s simply to thin and does not hold credibility

So you're saying the story is a hoax?

Holy shit.

Jacanuk is a perfect example of what happens when you live and breath Fox News 24/7.

Reminds me of Donovan's Mellow Yellow song... Saying he's in love with Saffron who's 14(he was 21 when he wrote the song)... Same song singing about vibrators lol.

I have changed my stance on Mr. Moore and this being a smear campaign. After further revelations and his interview with Sean Hannity only a fool can conclude absolutely nothing happened with underage girls.

The timing isn't great but that is politics in America. Sucks to be that guy. He's branded for the rest of his life.

Moore has threatened to sue the Washington Post over the allegations

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/360058-moore-threatens-to-sue-washington-post-over-allegations

A threat is not the same as actually filing one.

But this is clearly a PR stunt and also the only thing he could do , if he had done nothing you guys on the left would use it as a "proof" of his guilty.

Yes, thank you for recapping that it says he has threatened to sue

Good. So we have now confirmed you know this.

Whoops, fixed that for ya. I mean, it says it in the original post so I'm not sure what you are taking issue with

Apparently Mcconnell has now said he believes the women and that Moore should step aside