Establishment Christianity: Roy Moore, Tyranny, And a New Standard Of Guilt

in Politics by
   

There is a lot of blame to go around for Roy Moore’s loss in the special election for Senator from Alabama. The political establishment and media undertook a smear campaign shortly before the election based on alleged events from 40 years ago. The Republican Party abandoned its candidate, and Roy Moore failed to sufficiently attack his opponent as a baby-killing, gun-grabbing leftist.

However, when it comes down to it, there is one group of people that deserves the blame for Moore’s loss — Christian leaders. Whether it was Southern Baptists like Russell Moore or political commentators like David French from National Review, these men urged Christians to refrain from voting for Moore because of accusations of sexual misconduct from decades prior. Or in the case of French, he lambasted Moore for his record of “constitutional ignorance.”

What they often overlooked was the suspect circumstances of the allegations. Roy Moore had already served as a public figure in Alabama for years, twice as the Chief Justice of the state supreme court. Yet for some reason, all these allegations came out right before an election on the national stage. And everyone, including Christian leaders, assumed Moore was guilty.

Why such presumption of guilt? There is a simple explanation. The political establishment (both Democrats and Republicans) hated Moore long before any allegations of misconduct because he stood against federal tyranny. Moore had twice been removed as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Alabama, once for refusing to remove the Ten Commandments from his courtroom and the second time for ordering Alabama judges to refuse to administer same-sex marriage licenses. In both cases, Moore challenged what he considered unconstitutional and immoral usurpations by federal courts.

The allegations of misconduct only added fuel to the fire. But let us be clear: Moore’s loss is a victory for the political establishment. Both Democrats and the neoconservative Republicans got what they wanted. Sadly, such Republicans would prefer to lose a seat in the Senate (to a radically pro-abortion and left-wing candidate nonetheless) than to have a true conservative in office.



Christian leaders claim they could not support Roy Moore because the allegations of a 32-year-old going out with 17-year-old girls were just too much. But what they failed to understand is that Moore’s loss sets a new standard of guilt in the public eye. Political opponents can find swindlers to make allegations from decades ago—and even if there is no definitive proof and even if some allegations are proven false (e.g. the yearbook claim)—the allegations are still assumed to be true. You are guilty until proven innocent. And in Roy Moore’s case (who I believe is a good man), he was labeled a “pedophile.”

The victory of the establishment and the new standard of guilt should concern all Americans. But it is sad that this comes at the hands of Christian leaders, or what we might call the “Christian establishment.” Far too many prominent Christians assumed Moore’s guilt despite reasonable doubt, as it provided an easy out in regards to Moore’s anti-establishment ways. These Christian leaders labeled Moore as “lawless”—when in fact he was the one man willing to oppose tyrannical rulings like Obergefell. But they would rather submit to despots than rock the boat.

If only Christian leaders had the courage of Roy Moore, they would have stood against the establishment and its media outlets. Instead, they bowed to the political establishment. Unfortunately, this not a new practice, as Christian leaders in America have been caving to cultural and political pressure for years. It is time they grow a backbone. This was not the first time the establishment tried to silence a dissident, and it surely will not be the last.

Zachary Garris is a student at Wayne State University Law School (J.D. anticipated 2019) and holds a Master of Divinity from Reformed Theological Seminary (Jackson, MS). He writes at the Christian education site TeachDiligently.com and the Bible resource site KnowingScripture.com.

12 Comments

  1. It wasn’t the standard of proof, but his inability to follow the rule of law and the Constitution he swore to uphold that had him twice removed from a conservative Alabama court of judiciary.

    • What rule of law, what constitution? The ones liberals & others interpret according to their emotional dictates? Its amazing how an American written constitution is so inconsistent while the British constitution not written anywhere has been so consistent for almost a thousand years & makes more sense to me…

    • What new interpretation of the Constitution by federal judges?

      He was removed from his position in November 2003 by the Alabama Court of the Judiciary for refusing a federal court’s order to remove a marble monument of the Ten Commandments which he had installed in the lobby of the Alabama Judicial Building.

      Finally, he resigned his position after being threatened to be arrested for violating his oath of office again with gay marriage.

    • The US Supreme Court has Moses with two tablets carved on the building the irony…
      On to gay marriage in 2006 the people of Alabama voted for the sanctity of marriage. His stance on why all come to the same conclusion that marriage is not a role of the federal government and it belongs to the states

    • False. They are all facing and staring towards Justice. Please, take a trip to DC and read the Supreme Court’s “Lemon Test” that has been used for 60 years by a Conservative Supreme Court.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Latest from Politics



Wait! Before you leave, share this article!

Share this article!

Go to Top

Like and follow us on social media!