Roy Moore accused of sexual contact with 14-year old

[Sparko]

According to today's Western norms, yes.

Yep. We keep our children immature longer than they did 2000 years ago. While back then a person of 15 or so might be an adult, they were raised to be an adult at that age and had life experiences and training to be an adult for the most part. Today we keep our children very sheltered and protected and they are not mature or adults in their teens. I am sure there are exceptions, but I am speaking generally. They are emotionally children. They have no experience. For an adult in their 30s to "date" one of them is an abuse of authority and taking advantage of a child. A minor. And that is immoral.

[Cow Poke]

He's apologized. If he's going to be held to the same standard as Republicans, however, that's not nearly sufficient, and he should step down in penance.

He apologized sincerely for the act, or for getting caught?

[Sparko]

He apologized sincerely for the act, or for getting caught?

Source: Al Franken

https://www.facebook.com/senatoralfr...53158881436655

© Copyright Original Source

[Cow Poke]

That's an apology?

[Obsidian]

Yep. We keep our children immature longer than they did 2000 years ago.

Completely irrelevant. I don't think God particularly cares about your feelings on the matter. You don't make the rules.

Deuteronomy 4:2
Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.

[guacamole]

Completely irrelevant. I don't think God particularly cares about your feelings on the matter. You don't make the rules.

Deuteronomy 4:2
Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.

So how legalistic of an interpretation do you follow, and how much redaction and reason do you bring to determining the application of God's moral commandments?

[Sparko]

Completely irrelevant. I don't think God particularly cares about your feelings on the matter. You don't make the rules.

Deuteronomy 4:2
Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.

I think you're getting trolled. By several posters.

Still think they are only trolling me, guac?

[One Bad Pig]

Yep. We keep our children immature longer than they did 2000 years ago. While back then a person of 15 or so might be an adult, they were raised to be an adult at that age and had life experiences and training to be an adult for the most part. Today we keep our children very sheltered and protected and they are not mature or adults in their teens. I am sure there are exceptions, but I am speaking generally. They are emotionally children. They have no experience.

Generally speaking, I'm not sure I buy it. What "life experiences and training to be an adult" do you think they had? Western women are much more highly educated than women have been in any culture, ever.

[Sparko]

Generally speaking, I'm not sure I buy it. What "life experiences and training to be an adult" do you think they had? Western women are much more highly educated than women have been in any culture, ever.

They did not depend on their parents for care when they were 16 or 17. Today they live with their parents till they go off to college. As far as education goes, they didn't need schooling back then. Learning how to farm, grow food, take care of a home, raise children was all they needed and they knew that. They probably worked since they could walk. Back then there was no such thing as child labor. Putting a 12 year old to work back then was common too, but today we would consider it immoral to make our 12 year olds work a full time job.

[guacamole]

Still think they are only trolling me, guac?

Nope.

[Mountain Man]

That's an apology?

It's a deflection.

[Darth Executor]

They did not depend on their parents for care when they were 16 or 17.

what are you talking about, they most certainly did depend on their family. Today's level of independence and individualism is unprecedented in human history. Malnutrition (which delays development) was also a lot more common, whereas today it's virtually stamped out, not just in 1st world countries but also most 3rd world countries that aren't war zones. Even the nuclear family is a fairly recent development. The most common model is the extended family, which would be necessary for most people to ensure survival.

[Mountain Man]

Yeah a grown man dating teenage girls in high school is immoral.

Not inherently.

Yep. We keep our children immature longer than they did 2000 years ago. While back then a person of 15 or so might be an adult, they were raised to be an adult at that age and had life experiences and training to be an adult for the most part. Today we keep our children very sheltered and protected and they are not mature or adults in their teens. I am sure there are exceptions, but I am speaking generally. They are emotionally children. They have no experience. For an adult in their 30s to "date" one of them is an abuse of authority and taking advantage of a child. A minor. And that is immoral.

OK, you just added a bunch of qualifiers that go beyond simply the age of the person in question. So would you say that it's still immoral for a man in his 30s to date an emotionally mature 17-year old, assuming he was not in violation of age-of-consent laws?

[Sparko]

Not inherently.


OK, you just added a bunch of qualifiers that go beyond simply the age of the person in question. So would you say that it's still immoral for a man in his 30s to date an emotionally mature 17-year old, assuming he was not in violation of age-of-consent laws?

No because we are talking society here not exceptions. Would you think it is morally OK for a 30 year old to marry an emotionally mature 14 year old (if there were no laws against it)?

[guacamole]

Part of the mess in this is that we are talking about modern courtship rituals and talking about how appropriate it would have been based on ancient Jewish mores. It most definitely would have been immoral, in ancient Palestine, for a 30 year old man to show up expecting to court a young lady--of any marriageable age--without a male relative present, let alone use that as the mate-finding process. He could not secure permission to court a young lady from her mother, it would have come from her nearest male relative, and he or another minder would have been there monitoring all interactions. In any case, there would have been no courtship, it would have been an arranged marriage sealed with agreements between the father or other male relative and the prospective groom.

It's anachronistic nonsense that combines our culture's comparatively promiscuous mate selection ritual with the Biblical allowance for a much older man to marry a much younger woman. Moore cannot claim to have Biblical backing on this. If Moore had indeed done things in a more Biblical way, he'd be beyond reproach, unable to be accused of assaulting a minor because, at the very least, a relative would have been present. Instead, having allegedly cruised malls, made a pass at a girl at court, and made unpermitted remarks (without the permission of a male relative) in personal correspondence, he comes across, at worst as a creeper, and at best as a clumsy fool.

IOW, if we're going to argue the Biblical model, then argue it consistently and completely.

fwiw,
guacamole