[Benjamin F. Alexander]

Friends: Disregarding how you feel about Judge Roy Moore’s politics and his judicial conduct, please share your thoughts on this question. Do you think that people who are in their 70s should have to pay a price for the misdeeds they committed when they were in their 30s? If it turns out to be true that Roy Moore, four decades ago when he was an assistant district attorney in his 30s, pursued sexual relations with one or more girls in the 14-17 age range, should that disqualify him from being elected to the U.S. Senate now? Again, I’m posing this as a completely separate question from any other reasons one may have for not wanting Roy Moore in the Senate. What do you think?

(I’m hoping for two things with this question. I’m hoping that some differences of opinion will appear in this thread, and I’m hoping that all such differences of opinion will be friendly, as they’ve always been here before.)

[Yvonne Tulsie Seymour]

The allegations of Judge Roy Moore sexual misconduct forty years ago is a double edge sword. The girls involve were under age and were unable to give consent, this constitutes child molestation. Since then, Judge Roy Moore has made notable contributions to society. However, if these allegations are true he should have to face the consequence of his action, in a court of public opinion because he cannot be prosecuted in a court of law. When these events occur he was an assistant district attorney sworn to uphold the law. A senator must be a person of high moral standard.