here’s my previous response I made earlier about this whole issue.
*disclaimer*
warning: press your tl;dr button now if you aren’t functionally literate. All that’s going to happen if you read the whole thing if you’re *illiterate* is that you’re going to make personal attacks against my character and then threaten me or my loved ones with physical harm or distress.
remember, this is the internet, stop taking everything so seriously
***/end disclaimer***
I’d rather somebody resign because they weren’t doing their job. I could care less what they do in their own home.
Or are we trying to say that we don’t want people telling us what we can or can’t do in our own home as far as sexuality or marijuana but then we expect politicians to respect that when we force them to resign not based on their job performance but based on their sexuality?
Brian Jarvis:
If we evicted every individual in government office who has committed adultery (let alone phone sex and porn), we wouldn’t have much of a government left.
Politics, government, and and lying go hand in hand until you get down on a local level. Then it’s only *most* of the time.
I would think that in a democracy, despite our belief that the ‘other side’ is always winning in our government and always feeling like we’re on the losing team, our representatives represent a cross-section of *an* average population. Maybe not *our* average population but an average nonetheless.
Statistically speaking, we’re going to find adulterers in a certain percentage of a population no matter what government or religion or belief system you have so I’d have to argue that basing your feelings about a particular representative based on his home life or his sexuality is pretty weak because you’re not going to change a person’s sexuality and you definitely shouldn’t be dictating what other people do in their homes unless they are harming others or in a politician’s case, creating a conflict of interest.
No matter how hard we try, we are always going to have adulterers in office, I suggest we get over it and start focusing on the actual issues. Spending time on incidents we cannot resolve keeps us from the ones that we *can* change and the ones that we *can* resolve.
Quit being a passive citizen led around by your base emotions and start projecting your energies into creating solutions for the issues that *do* cause us personal harm or cause us to lose our civil liberties.
Brian Jarvis:
Part of this problem stems from the expectation that all politicians are supposed to have monogamous relationships.
For all we know both husband and wife have a don’t ask don’t tell policy while on business. (Lots of couples do.) Someone in the public catches something juicy from time to time, leaks info the the public, and a politician has no choice but to come clean if they want to keep doing their job without losing even more face than they already have.
For many spouses of politicians, it’s more of a strain that the issue goes public than it is that their husband was with another woman.
We don’t know this entire story. So much in the political world is done for face simply because human beings can’t accept others for who they are without instantly judnging them.