Infidelity

[GwynnInTheHall]

and other sex scandals.....Should they be a disqualifier for those seeking/holding office?

I am of course, not talking about sexual abuse/harassment, which I believe should be absolute disqualifiers, I'm speaking about cheating on spouses/partners, having nude pictures/videos taken of yourself (and or others) even sophomoric behavior that alludes to sex/sexual behaviors.


The one thing I don't hold against Trump is his personal life such as his cheating, his infidelity and so on. I didn't hold it against Clinton, nor do I hold it against any politician regardless of stripe.

The latest to resign is Ca Dem Katie Hill after having an affair that was filmed and released to the public.

I've stated I have no issue with this, what say the Sports Bar?

[Ken]

Interesting question.

Has there ever been a major infidelity scandal that did not involve lying and attempts to cover it up? I wonder if that takes it to a different realm.

[Gregg]

and other sex scandals.....Should they be a disqualifier for those seeking/holding office?

I am of course, not talking about sexual abuse/harassment, which I believe should be absolute disqualifiers, I'm speaking about cheating on spouses/partners, having nude pictures/videos taken of yourself (and or others) even sophomoric behavior that alludes to sex/sexual behaviors.


The one thing I don't hold against Trump is his personal life such as his cheating, his infidelity and so on. I didn't hold it against Clinton, nor do I hold it against any politician regardless of stripe.

The latest to resign is Ca Dem Katie Hill after having an affair that was filmed and released to the public.

I've stated I have no issue with this, what say the Sports Bar?

Great topic and good start.

What about other moral issues. Drunkenness, drugs, stealing, etc.

Who gets to decide?

Can a President have one mistress or hundreds. Does it matter if it is before he ran or during his presidency?

[Sour Masher]

I don't think it should be on its own, no. Until the cover up and/or the abuse of power from using a position to have or cover up the affair, or using campaign funds to facilitate or cover up the affair, it is a private matter. Although, I suppose one concern would be blackmail. Other than that, though, I don't know all the specifics of a person's life. I don't know if they are in loveless or sexless marriage or have some sort of understanding or open relationship. I would not know enough and wouldn't want to know in many cases. I mean, if the info is out there and the details makes the person look bad, that influences my opinion and possibly my vote. Edwards cheating on his wife with cancer made me think poorly of him, for instance. On the other hand, HRC seems to have known who her husband was and made a political decision to be with him. Likewise, Melania seems to have traded love and respect from her husband for the life of leisure and wealth. His non-assault, mutually agreed to affairs are very low on the list of offenses for Trump, to me. It is hard for me to vote for a person I don't respect or trust. But it is case by case, depends on who it is, who the opponent is, what the nature of the affair was, etc. So I don't think it should automatically disqualify a candidate.

[B-Fly]

It can be a factor to consider in broader context, sure. I don't think it's a disqualifier in the sense that it surpasses everything else one should be considering when deciding among or between candidates.

[Kevin Seitzer]

It speaks to the character of the candidate, which I would consider more important in some positions than others. But so do a lot of other things. I think in general I would just prefer not to know, but that's not really the world we live in any more.

[Sour Masher]

If you think of all the important public figures, including many great leaders, who have infidelity as a stain on their record, it seems absurd to treat it as an automatic disqualifier. Many people have been great leaders and also cheats on their spouses. Times are changing, though, and these things are more front and center. Would MLK have lost his standing as a Civil Rights leader if he had engaged in his affairs in an age of social media? Johnson tried to discredit him as did many opponents, because of the hypocrisy of a Christian preacher cheating on his wife, but they did not really stick, I assume, in part, because many recognized the man was not his message. He may have been flawed, but his work and mission were noble. Maybe people would see it differently today. To me, his failures as a husband do not take away from the good works he did as a Civil Fights leader. People can have greatness and weakness in them, and people can be really great at their jobs while being bad at being a spouse.

[Gregg]

If you think of all the important public figures, including many great leaders, who have infidelity as a stain on their record, it seems absurd to treat it as an automatic disqualifier. Many people have been great leaders and also cheats on their spouses. Times are changing, though, and these things are more front and center. Would MLK have lost his standing as a Civil Rights leader if he had engaged in his affairs in an age of social media? Johnson tried to discredit him as did many opponents, because of the hypocrisy of a Christian preacher cheating on his wife, but they did not really stick, I assume, in part, because many recognized the man was not his message. He may have been flawed, but his work and mission were noble. Maybe people would see it differently today. To me, his failures as a husband do not take away from the good works he did as a Civil Fights leader. People can have greatness and weakness in them, and people can be really great at their jobs while being bad at being a spouse.

Then why get married?

[The Feral Slasher]

Then why get married?

Thank you, Greg !

[Gregg]

If you think of all the important public figures, including many great leaders, who have infidelity as a stain on their record, it seems absurd to treat it as an automatic disqualifier. Many people have been great leaders and also cheats on their spouses. Times are changing, though, and these things are more front and center. Would MLK have lost his standing as a Civil Rights leader if he had engaged in his affairs in an age of social media? Johnson tried to discredit him as did many opponents, because of the hypocrisy of a Christian preacher cheating on his wife, but they did not really stick, I assume, in part, because many recognized the man was not his message. He may have been flawed, but his work and mission were noble. Maybe people would see it differently today. To me, his failures as a husband do not take away from the good works he did as a Civil Fights leader. People can have greatness and weakness in them, and people can be really great at their jobs while being bad at being a spouse.

Public figures do damage to their message and legacy when they cannot control their selfish desires.

[nullnor]

I admit I tried to google Katie Hill nude revenge porn pics and was disappointed when I couldn't find them.

[Sour Masher]

Then why get married?

It is expected in our society and some people want it both ways--they want a family and stability, but then sometimes something goes missing and they don't want to end everything. For MLK specifically, I imagine religion and his legacy were factors. For instance, it is fairly common for women to change physiologically after having children. Some women no long are interested in sex at a certain point. That goes for some men too. In fact depending on how my sister's boyfriend's treatment for testicular cancer goes, that part of their relationship may be over.

But that question doesn't seem like an essential question to this topic, though. I wasn't trying to justify infidelity with my response. I was providing examples of how one's life work as a politicians or public figure can be noble and good while one's private life as a husband may be not good. We don't ask if our doctor cheated on his or her spouse, or our mechanic, etc. But I get that we ask our political leaders to be moral leaders too. I get it is different. I think it should be a factor. It goes to character and trust. But there is a lot of evidence that some people, men mostly, can compartmentalize and are good and trustworthy in their jobs, but still commit adultery. I wouldn't argue against someone choosing not to vote for someone who has been outed as an adultery. It would be a factor in my vote, but it wouldn't be an automatic disqualifier.

[Sour Masher]

Public figures do damage to their message and legacy when they cannot control their selfish desires.

I agree. But would you automatically not vote for a candidate rumored or proven to have had an affair? Are there any mitigating circumstances that make the offense less severe in your mind? Also, on the matter of sex scandals in general, what if we are not talking about cheating? What if it is a sextape of a three-way with the spouse and another partner? What if they admit to being in an open relationship? There are many sexual behaviors that you would not engage in yourself, but which of these, do you think, disqualify you from public service, and which do not?

On a related note, how do you think Evangelicals justify supporting Trump, despite his many admitted infidelities? It can't just be SC, because they are highly favorable about it as a whole, and supported him above other more moral candidates.

[Gregg]

It is expected in our society and some people want it both ways--they want a family and stability, but then sometimes something goes missing and they don't want to end everything. For MLK specifically, I imagine religion and his legacy were factors. For instance, it is fairly common for women to change physiologically after having children. Some women no long are interested in sex at a certain point. That goes for some men too. In fact depending on how my sister's boyfriend's treatment for testicular cancer goes, that part of their relationship may be over.

But that question doesn't seem like an essential question to this topic, though. I wasn't trying to justify infidelity with my response. I was providing examples of how one's life work as a politicians or public figure can be noble and good while one's private life as a husband may be not good. We don't ask if our doctor cheated on his or her spouse, or our mechanic, etc. But I get that we ask our political leaders to be moral leaders too. I get it is different. I think it should be a factor. It goes to character and trust. But there is a lot of evidence that some people, men mostly, can compartmentalize and are good and trustworthy in their jobs, but still commit adultery. I wouldn't argue against someone choosing not to vote for someone who has been outed as an adultery. It would be a factor in my vote, but it wouldn't be an automatic disqualifier.

Actually is does matter. I had a very good mechanic suggest to me to "hurry up and sell" my daughters car before the head gasket completely went. I know he thought he was doing me a favor by suggesting that. In reality I know he would have no problem lying or cheating me if he could suggest I do it someone else. I told him I couldn't do that, scrapped the car and found a different mechanic.

I expect my mechanics to be more honest than my politicians. Did i mention I hate politics.

[Gregg]

I agree. But would you automatically not vote for a candidate rumored or proven to have had an affair? Are there any mitigating circumstances that make the offense less severe in your mind? Also, on the matter of sex scandals in general, what if we are not talking about cheating? What if it is a sextape of a three-way with the spouse and another partner? What if they admit to being in an open relationship? There are many sexual behaviors that you would not engage in yourself, but which of these, do you think, disqualify you from public service, and which do not?

On a related note, how do you think Evangelicals justify supporting Trump, despite his many admitted infidelities? It can't just be SC, because they are highly favorable about it as a whole, and supported him above other more moral candidates.

Good one. I want to respond but I have to do it later.