In addition to believing that gay sex is a sin, that same-sex parents should have their children taken away from them and then be sent to prison, that a zygote is exactly as much a person as the woman whose body it occupies from the moment of conception, Roy Moore believes that the Supreme Court case that paved the way for nationwide legal contraception was a mistake.

It’s starting to seem like Alabama Senate candidate Roy Moore believes that everybody should face consequences for sex except Roy Moore.

In June, Moore shared his extremely on-brand dangerous wackiness on birth control at a gathering of young republicans (a creepy group for Moore to address knowing what we know now, but I digress). Moore explained that things like “rights” and “sex having” might sound cool in theory, but in practice, they could destroy society as we know it. Just take a look at Griswold v. Connecticut, the 1965 Supreme Court ruling that struck down a law that barred married women from obtaining contraception from their doctors. "The next couple of years after that,” Moore explained to the crowd, “they went to unmarried couples. Then they went to children. Then they went to Roe v. Wade, they went to sodomy, and it's a continual etching, 'til now we're talking about kids being taken to doctors to alter their body parts, by parents who believe they're a different gender. We're in a crazy society."

Birth control leads to sodomy? What? For straight couples, birth control makes sodomy less necessary! Duh, Roy.

Joking aside, there’s a lot to unpack here. Griswold is a case so settled that revisiting it is psychotically out of touch, like most things Roy Moore believes. But instead of this particularly weird Bible grope, I’d like to focus primarily on Moore’s insistence that birth control is going to “children.” Doctors do not prescribe birth control to prepubescent girls. Moore must mean that girls who have had their periods and are not yet legally adults are technically “children.”

Last week, we learned that Roy Moore allegedly molested a 14-year-old girl and romantically pursued three other teens when he was in his thirties. This week, another woman came forward to allege that Moore tried to rape her when she was a 16-year-old waitress. We also learned that around the same time, Moore was banned from a local mall for badgering young girls. It’s a miracle Roy Moore ever found the time to pass judgement on the sexual proclivities of others in the first place, what with all the time he spent during his 30’s trying to molest teenagers.

I’m actually confused about what Roy Moore thinks he did. He has not denied the Washington Post reports that say he pursued relationships with teenage girls. He denied the allegation that he molested a 14-year-old, but alluded that he never went out with a “young lady” without her mother’s permission. Not much of a denial.

But earlier this year, Moore alluded to “children” having birth control. So what is it? Are the 14-17 year-old girls Roy Moore tried to date in his thirties children or not? Are they “children” if they’re on birth control, but young ladies if they’re in Roy Moore’s car? Or are they only “children” if he’s not asking them out on a date outside of family court? Does his sexual interest in them turn them into women? Will any of the lunatic dipshits who stuck with Roy Moore up to this point care?

As the RNC trips over its own dick responding to Roy Moore waving his around, one thing is clear: Roy Moore should not be allowed within 500 feet of a middle school, much less in the U.S. Senate. And he should be nowhere near anything that will give him a say on women’s access to health care.