Moore Lies About Wanting to Kill Gay People

The Washington Post has a profile of Christian fascist Roy Moore and his campaign for the Senate. In it, Moore lies about his support for the state putting gay people to death and using the Bible to justify it. We have his own writings to prove that he’s lying.


The central argument of Moore’s campaign is that removing the sovereignty of a Christian God from the functions of government is an act of apostasy, an affront to the biblical savior as well as the Constitution. Among the prices he says this country has paid for denying God’s supremacy: the high murder rate in Chicago, crime on the streets of Washington, child abuse, rape and sodomy. It’s a crisis he hopes to address next year from the floor of the Senate…

Moore has always been controversial, and proudly so. As a judge, he denied granting custody of three teenagers to their mother, who was in a lesbian relationship, writing that her private behavior was “an inherent evil against which children must be protected.”…

“One thing I do not want you to do, because it’s not right, is to say that I believe in biblical punishments,” he explained during the drive, which included periodic rain storms that blotted out the rolling forest and farmland. “I’ve been accused of saying I want to kill homosexuals because the Bible says. And I don’t.”

Here’s what I don’t understand: Why does the Post quote that line from the Ex Parte HH ruling about homosexuality being an “inherent evil” but not quote the part that directly contradicts the lie he told them? It’s right there in black and white. He cites the Bible repeatedly on the evils of homosexuality and explicitly says that the state should either imprison gay people or kill them.

Natural law forms the basis of the common law.7  Natural law is the law of nature and of nature’s God as understood by men through reason, but aided by direct revelation found in the Holy Scriptures:

“The doctrines thus delivered we call the revealed or divine law, and they are to be found only in the Holy Scriptures.   These precepts, when revealed, are found upon comparison to be really a part of the original law of nature, as they tend in all their consequences to man’s felicity.”…

“When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.”

It would be an odd logic to assert that the American colonies could use the law of God “to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature’s God entitle them,” but not to decide the fundamental basis of their laws.

Of course, the notion that “nature and nature’s God” referred to the God of the Bible is absurd when we know it was written by Thomas Jefferson, who rejected the God of the Bible as “cruel, capricious, vindictive and unjust” and dismissed the gospel writers as a “band of dupes and impostors.” Moore is just borrowing from the David Barton school of historical lies.

Homosexuality is strongly condemned in the common law because it violates both natural and revealed law. The author of Genesis writes: “God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them…. For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh.” Genesis 1:27, 2:24 (King James). The law of the Old Testament enforced this distinction between the genders by stating that “[i]f a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination.” Leviticus 20:13 (King James)…

To disfavor practicing homosexuals in custody matters is not invidious discrimination, nor is it legislating personal morality.   On the contrary, disfavoring practicing homosexuals in custody matters promotes the general welfare of the people of our State in accordance with our law, which is the duty of its public servants.   Providing for the common good involves maintaining a public morality through both our criminal and civil codes, based upon the principles that right conscience demands, without encroaching on the jurisdiction of other institutions and the declared rights of individuals.

The State may not interfere with the internal governing, structure, and maintenance of the family, but the protection of the family is a responsibility of the State.   Custody disputes involve decision-making by the State, within the limits of its sphere of authority, in a way that preserves the fundamental family structure. The State carries the power of the sword, that is, the power to prohibit conduct with physical penalties, such as confinement and even execution.   It must use that power to prevent the subversion of children toward this lifestyle, to not encourage a criminal lifestyle.

So yes, he does favor, at the very least, the imprisoning of gay people, if not outright killing them (he’s at least okay that, even if he doesn’t advocate it), and he quotes the Bible to support that position. He’s lying. And the Post, which clearly had access to the ruling from which that text comes, because they quoted from it, doesn’t bother to point out that he’s lying. Bad journalism. You can read the ruling for yourself here.

"An economy and politics rigged by and for the capitalist class, creates a new tax-law ..."

Trump Considering Privatizing the War in ..."
""... So even if you could, you could by one more plane. That’ll make a ..."

Trump Cancels His Military Parade

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment