On Wed 20 Nov, Luke Weiger wrote:
> You don't have to be an absolutist to condemn adultery in _most_
> circumstances.
Really? I think adultery is never relevant to a person's political qualifications. Surely if anything should be a private problem, it's adultery. And surely liberals should be against judging people politically on the basis of their private lives?
A lot of adultery reflects people in transition between marriages. Since serial marriages are now the norm, so are periods of adultery. To condemn it in "most circumstances" seems to me to imply that everyone who dissolves a marriage -- or who keeps one together after almost doing so -- is committing some kind of offense.
Michael