80% of White Evangelicals Backed Alleged Child Molester Roy Moore in Loss

[muriel_volestrangler]

80% of white born-again Christians supported Roy Moore, according to the Washington Post.



To put that another way, a majority of white evangelicals are upset that a child molester won’t represent their Christian values in the Senate.
Those results also show that literally everyone else refused to back someone as bigoted, theocratic, and perverse as Moore. (You’re welcome, America.)

Read more at http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2017/12/12/80-of-white-evangelicals-backed-alleged-child-molester-roy-moore-in-loss/#I5Jv22S2M6Gj2sM5.99

Being a white evangelical is basically belonging to a political cult, these days.

[Voltaire2]

1. the biblical age of consent is puberty.

So there is no contradiction here.

[yallerdawg]

2. Of course - "Glass Half Empty Syndrome."

20% of white born-again Christians rejected their "standard-bearer!"

What was that winning margin again?

[Cuthbert Allgood]

3. Of course--"Glass 1/5 Full Syndrome"

I would hope that more than 20% of people that are overtly religious and hold that moral code to the rest of the population regardless of that population's religion would not vote for someone with the laundry list of horrible things that Moore had.

But, yeah, you be happy that 4 out of 5 still voted for this jackass.

[yallerdawg]

4. Why would you say that?

I'm celebrating the 1 out of 5 who made a difference for all of us!

Tribalism is alive and well.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

5. Because that is a fucking horrible percentage.

1 out of 5 evangelical Christians said blacks should have rights
1 out of 5 evangelical Christians said gays shouldn't be killed
1 out of 5 evangelical Christians said it's wrong for a 30 year old to date a 14 year old
1 out of 5 evangelical Christians said our government should not be making decisions based on religion

Do you think any of those numbers are good? Because that--and a LOT more--are what are at issue here. That's horrible. Evangelical Christians can go fuck themselves and their sense of moral authority if those are the numbers that actually vote against horrific things.

And, yeah, if it's tribalism for all non-evangelical Christians to tell evangelical Christians that they are fucking crazy, then, sure, long live Tribalism. I tend to call it embracing my humanity, but your mileage obviously varies.

[yallerdawg]

6. I'm celebrating that 1 out of 5 who voted with us!

In a state that is 75% church-going Christians who are as Deep, Dark Red as they come!

A whole lot of 'those' people sat this one out!

"Glass Half Empty Syndrome."

[Cuthbert Allgood]

12. So you are OK with the fact that "church-going Christians"

are homophobic bigots that don't care about child rape? Oh, but 1 in 5 aren't! Big fucking deal. 4 in 5 are. That's horrifying.

[yallerdawg]

14. You identify them in the absolute crudest way possible.

They were not supporting "homophobic bigotry and child rape."

But, hey - keep driving them away from us with our misinformation, wildly judgmental distortions, and intolerance. Good plan.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

15. They voted for it.

Their moral center was not strong enough to cause them to not vote for it. Those things that he supports and did were not enough of a line for them to not cross.

I guarantee you that if the Dem running for senate in my state had done those things, I would not have voted for him. Period. Statutory rape is a line I'm not willing to cross. Hard stop. Apparently for 80% of evangelical Christians, statutory rape is a line they are fine hopping over.

And if they hop over that line, then THEY are the ones that need to do some introspection about their life choices if they don't want me and, really everyone else, telling them they are fucking crazy. That's on them. They crossed that line.

[brush]

27. We don't want them. Believe me. To appeal to them we would have to adapt policies that would...

push others in our coalition away.

Ever thought of that?

[Mariana]

16. So it was less than one in five

if you include all those who didn't vote at all. Do you have an estimate how many sat this one out who normally would have voted? I wonder what percentage, overall, of white evangelicals just could not bring themselves to vote against Moore, if we include both those who voted for him and those who stayed home.

[yallerdawg]

17. If religion guides the vote...

how do you explain the absolutist depiction of Doug Jones support of extreme liberal positions on abortion and LGBTQ rights - and a significant number of Christians who just let this happen!

That is what I see.

[Mariana]

19. You see that 80% plus of white evangelicals

let their religiously motivated hatred of LGBTQ people and their religiously motivated disdain for women's reproductive rights prevent them from voting against a disgusting creature like Roy Moore? And you think that's something to celebrate?

[yallerdawg]

20. You are ignoring the 60% of voters who stayed home.

If the so-called "hatred" of gays and women's rights was the driving force motivating Christian vote, how could Jones have possibly won?

Unless - you're wrong?

[Mariana]

21. I never said it was the driving force motivating the Christian vote.

You might notice, if you actually read my posts, that I was very specific about which Christians I was talking about. I don't believe, as you seem to imagine I do, that every Christian is identical in beliefs, motivations, and behavior. Certainly African American Christians in Alabama didn't vote 80% in favor of Moore, so clearly it isn't a problem with all Alabama Christians. Just most of them.

Jones squeaked by only because the Republicans put up an absolutely loathsome candidate. That is the only reason. If the news about Moore's utterly creepy and possibly criminal behavior had never come out, he would have won handily. Do you disagree?

[Lordquinton]

24. Roughly 97% of African Americans voted for Jones

And that 3% are getting the side-eye.

That is the main difference here.

[Mariana]

25. A higher percentage of African Americans than whites in Alabama

identify as "born again" or "evangelical". It's a pretty safe bet that few of them enthusiastically support marriage equality and abortion rights, but somehow, almost all of them found it in themselves to go to the polls and vote against that disgusting POS Roy Moore. But we're supposed to be excited because 20% of white evangelicals (very likely less than that) did so? Not likely.

I wish Yallerdawg would explain this discrepancy. Are 80% (or more) of white Alabama evangelicals racist? Are the African Americans not really born again or not true evangelicals? Why such a huge difference?

[Lordquinton]

38. I don't know too much

but aside from some details, I would assume that white and black evangelism have divergent beliefs. That would be interesting to see some research on.

those details aside, it's still a big difference in how this issue is being approached. 20% weren't absolute trash and acted like human beings in this instance. They don't get high praise and parades for that when we know it's not a trend but because the stakes were so high. It kinda comes back to abusers acting semi decent once in a great while and that's what gets remembered.

[guillaumeb]

28. And you have statistics, of course, to back those claims?

80% of evangelical Christians say gays should be killed?

Perhaps you should post this as a separate thing, with the appropriate links of course.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

33. 80% of evangelical Christians voted for Moore

Moore's stance on gays, Muslims, women's rights, and a host of other issue are well know. NONE of those stances were a line in the sand that 80% of evangelical Christians wouldn't cross. NONE OF THEM.

So, fuck them. They can live in their hate filled world and I don't feel a bit bad saying that they are horrible fucking people.

YMMV

[guillaumeb]

39. It certainly took you a bit of space to admit that you have nothing

to back up your claim. Thank you for the admission that your previous statement was pure hyperbole.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

54. If you didn't know that I was purposefully posting hyperbole

then you need to get your detector fixed. It was pretty clear.

But you don't seem to make any comment on the fact that for 80% of evangelicals, none of those things were enough of a line in the sand to stop them from voting for this piece of shit. Apparently, they feel Jesus is just fine with those viewpoints. So, YAY, 20% were actually embracing their humanity at the most basic level.

[edhopper]

7. Pretzel Logic

[yallerdawg]

8. Stay committed.

ALL Christians bad.

(even when they're not)

[edhopper]

9. Nice strawman

Not all, but in this case most. Something you refuse to admit.

Looking at the bright side of 80 fucking percent of born agains supporting a child molester is the epitome of a blind eye.

[yallerdawg]

10. Everything's made of straw for you!

20% took the road less traveled.

And it has made all the difference.

Not to mention all the Christian voters who sat this out and let the cards fall where they may!

Render unto Caesar, as they say.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

11. You got Robert Frost all wrong.

That's not what that poem means at all.

[edhopper]

22. Less voted for Jones

than voted for Obama.

But keep those blinders on.

[guillaumeb]

29. Like the write in Christians?

I noticed the unsupported claim that 80% of Christians feel killing gays is acceptable.

[marylandblue]

34. Nobody said 80% of Christians support it.

But 80% of white evangelical Christians in Alabama don't see it as a dealbreaker. That's the problem.

[guillaumeb]

40. Yes, some one actually did, in reply #5

1 out of 5 evangelical Christians said blacks should have rights
1 out of 5 evangelical Christians said gays shouldn't be killed
1 out of 5 evangelical Christians said it's wrong for a 30 year old to date a 14 year old
1 out of 5 evangelical Christians said our government should not be making decisions based on religion

If you look at the portion that I bolded, you will notice that the poster claims that only 20%, or 1 out of 5, of evangelical Christians...etc.

And later in the thread, after I asked for proof, the poster failed to actually supply any statistics to back up the claim.

So yes, someone actually did say it.

[marylandblue]

44. Alright I guess they did then

Last edited Thu Dec 14, 2017, 07:28 PM - Edit history (1)

I don't think voting for Moore means that you agree with everything he said. But it does bother me that his behavior was not an automatic dealbreaker for so many evangelicals. Makes their claims to morality in politics hollow.

[guillaumeb]

46. To me it represents the Mitch McConnell viewpoint:

Retaining power justifies anything. And it also justifies supporting anyone with an (R) after their name.

[marylandblue]

47. For McConnell, it's all about the tax cuts

For white evangelicals, it's all about the misogynistic, homophobic, anti-science dominionist Bible world view. Along with racism.

At least McConnell is honest. He wants tax cuts for himself and his friends. White evangelicals pretend like they are saving the country from the fate of Sodom and Gamorah.

[guillaumeb]

48. I do not feel that white evangelicals are all pretending.

Some truly feel that they are under attack. And their conception of what the US is, and was, intended to be.

[marylandblue]

49. You are right, they are not all pretending

Many have been brainwashed. Some are just uncomfortable with the rapid pace of change in modern society.

[guillaumeb]

50. Agreed. Some apparently would prefer an imagined past to the actual present. eom

[Mariana]

13. That's about the same percentage of white evangelicals

who voted for Trump nationwide in 2016. At least they're consistent.

[Pope George Ringo II]

18. This is a good example of where religion and morality conflict

When you do things based on getting either reward or punishment rather than being good or bad, you're not making a decision about being moral; you're making a decision about being obedient. These people are trying to get to their own Celestial North Koreas, so that controls their actions instead of what appears to be a rather atrophied sense of morality.

[trotsky]

23. GREAT point.

When you do things based on getting either reward or punishment rather than being good or bad, you're not making a decision about being moral; you're making a decision about being obedient.

You position yourself to have your morality *defined* by a suitable authority figure, with no rationale behind it at all.

[Pope George Ringo II]

31. I wish I could take credit for the observation

But as long as they're trying to avoid some version of hell and get into some version of heaven, they're asking themselves what a bunch of bronze-age savages would want them to do, rather than asking themselves what is the right thing to do. It's one of the areas where dualism really messed up some of the religions which stole from it for definitions of the afterlife.

It's not really a surprise when following a religion more closely results in following the bronze-age savages' behavioral script more often, resulting in a moral cripple completely unable to make genuine moral decisions. But at least it explains how somebody could be messed up enough to actually want parts of the Desert Quadrilogy to be true.

[guillaumeb]

30. What a bizarre logical and rhetorical leap this is.

If there were a long jump contest for such things, this might be Olympic quality.

By the way, in the mixed metaphor category, North Korea is an officially atheist country. But do not let that stop you.

Amazing also is your apparent mind-reading ability, as evidenced by your various claims as to why people are acting as they are.

[trotsky]

32. When you are ready to step up to actual dialog and not bullying, you can answer this question:

Is something good because God likes it, or does God like it because it's good?

[guillaumeb]

41. Actual dialogue like the post that I replied to?

Does that qualify as actual dialogue, in your opinion? If it does, we have far different ideas of what constitutes dialogue.

[trotsky]

51. Be the change you want to see.

Try and answer my question.

I guarantee you will get a respectful reply from me.

Now answer it and show me how grown-up you can be.

[guillaumeb]

52. I cannot answer for God.

Now, what is good? Does the idea of what is good change from society to society?

When you ask such a question about what is a subjective concept, do you really expect a definitive answer?

If so, why?

[trotsky]

53. I didn't ask you to answer for your god.

Try again. You attempted to dodge the question and then throw a bunch at me instead.

Answer mine first. I realize that theists have struggled with the question since it was first posted, and no one has been able to provide an answer, but perhaps you can be the first.

But I bet you won't. You'll just get upset that I won't be diverted by your attempt to reframe and change the subject. Go ahead, show me that's what you'll do.

[marylandblue]

36. Go research "theory of mind" and get back to us

Most humans, dogs and even birds read each other's motivations, yet you think it is some mind of strange thing for humans to do. Why is this? Are you really so adverse to a basic mental and highly useful capacity? Even if you don't use it yourself, attacking it is spitting into the wind.

[guillaumeb]

42. It was a straw man construction.

A construct that is unprovable and that reveals much about the commenter.

[marylandblue]

43. That's not the definition of a strawman

Has nothing to do with unproveability and reveals nothing about the mind of the commenter. You just routinely dismiss any discussion of intent, which is strange. People who don't understand how other people attribute intent to the action of others are called "mind blind." I know people like that. I am assuming you are one of them, rather than just trying to misdirect the conversatiom into a side issue.

[guillaumeb]

45. I should have added the word and after the first line.

With that editing in mind, I stand by my statement.

[marylandblue]

35. Also, when society has changed a lot in the last 3,000 years

But you are still getting your morality from Bronze Age shepherds, that can create a little bit of a problem.

[Pope George Ringo II]

37. As long as you cover rules for slavery and beating your wife, you're on top of things

These things never change, after all.

[stonecutter357]

26. Doug Jones victory speech .