supergee: (coy2)
Arthur D. Hlavaty ([personal profile] supergee) wrote2019-01-03 06:20 am

"Personal morality"

Jerry Falwell Jr. says that we shouldn’t judge the president by his “personal morality” (by which he means, as his kind always does, sexual morality). I think the blind pig has found an acorn. Trump’s politics should get him thrown out of office, and his business dealings should get him locked up, but the adultery is his business. Any political scale that ranks Richard Nixon ahead of Martin Luther King is broken.

[personal profile] notasupervillain 2019-01-03 11:27 am (UTC)(link)
I don't have any problem with the adultery. I have a problem with the alleged sexual harassment and sexual assault. But that was described to me as the difference between the progressives and the Christian far right. I'm okay with almost anything two consenting adults do (with some barriers around the word "consent"). The Christian far right is okay with almost anything two married people do. Sometimes the Venn diagrams overlap.
minoanmiss: Minoan lady holding a bright white star (Lady With Star)

[personal profile] minoanmiss 2019-01-03 10:26 pm (UTC)(link)
This, so much this.

(Honeslty, from my experience of the Christian Far Right, it's okay with anything heterosexual a man wants to do, the consent of the women or girls involved being irrelevant.)

[personal profile] notasupervillain 2019-01-04 07:10 am (UTC)(link)
Women don't need opinions!
mount_oregano: portrait by Badassity (Default)

[personal profile] mount_oregano 2019-01-03 11:33 pm (UTC)(link)
Falwell is more than willing to judge and do harm to everyone else for their "personal morality." He only makes an exception for Trump because he likes his politics. So I don't think Falwell found an acorn. He found a turd of blatant hypocrisy and tried to polish it look like moral high ground.

For the record, I don't think that acts between consenting adults are anyone's business. And I don't think that we can get moral guidance of any sort from Jerry Farwell Jr.
Edited 2019-01-03 23:34 (UTC)
marahmarie: (M In M Forever) (Default)

[personal profile] marahmarie 2019-01-04 09:42 am (UTC)(link)
I dunno, but am leaning toward "not OK with the adultery" because we already know who this guy is: objectifying of, denigrating toward and dismissive of women who probably cheated in a non-consensual way (behind his wive's backs, without their permission or knowledge, which has done nothing but embarrass them in the revelation) which speaks to his (lack of) character and respect for others, much less those he's vowed to honor and obey the rest of his life.

Call me a mite old-fashioned, I guess *shrug*

Editing to add: and yeah, I had a problem with Clinton cheating, too, and thought/still think less of him for it. The only reason I endured it was because by the standards of those days he was, to my mind, an excellent president, so I didn't want the country to have to lose him over his personal issues. Back then we were all much more dismissive of such things, though (I wasn't, but Majority Opinion was 'Eh, boys will be boys', so).

Edited 2019-01-04 09:47 (UTC)