Do you hold the President up to, or close to, the standard of the clergy in your religion?

Yes, I do. That’s because I don’t hold either Ministers or Presidents to exceptionally high standards. They’re people to me, that’s all.

I agree that it is dangerous to place politicians on a pedestal.

No, I hold them to the same standards I hold myself.

It both amuses and irritates me how the media goes bat shit crazy reporting on the sexcapades of our public officials, lurid articles filled with innuendo and speculation.

Seems to me Europeans are much more grown up and sophisticated in their response to sexual activity among their politicians; here in the US we are still hiding out in the bathroom drooling on our Hustler magazines.

As @rojo, I hold them and myself to the same standard.

Yet the error in your friend’s thinking (from my point of view) is thinking we as the public have any “standard” to place on an adult’s sexual behavior as long as it doesn’t involve children, animals, or coercion. Sex is private and personal, and as long as it isn’t rape or abuse, is nobody’s business except for one’s partners.

He’s a person trying to keep 300 million people happy. Let him blow off some steam from time to time. He isn’t a god. I wouldn’t want the job.

I have had conversations about Clinton’s escapades with Republican friends. Their take on it is that it shows he’s a liar and that we shouldn’t want or have a liar for President, as it says something about his morals. My assumption is that all politicians are liars or have altered the truth in some way at some point.

I also agree that a person’s sexual life is between them and their partner, as long as it doesn’t involve anything criminal. As far as clergy, the clergy that I’ve known of are human like anybody else, cheating, lying, or not.

To those who think that sort of thing matters, only clergy should be eligible for political office anyways.

Then again, if Clinton were a Republican, it never would’ve been an issue.

I expect them both to practice what they preach. If a politician is preaching so called “family values” I expect them to live by those values. Also, if he preaches environmental conservation I would expect him to not drive a hummer.
If a minister is preaching ministering to the needs of the poor I expect him to forego the private jet, but with a minister I can choose not to live my life under their decisions, but I’m forced to live with the decisions of politicians.

No. Despite nonsensical notions to the contrary, politics and governing are decidedly immoral professions. Anyone with a lick of sense should realize by the 5th grade that piloting the United States is a job requiring “flexible” ethics and there’s a reason that Jimmy Carter is not our “greatest” President.

To my mind, we are probably better off with Presidents whose moral failings merely amount to sexual indiscretions.

You must keep in mind that the sexual escapes of Bill Clinton went way beyond Monica Lewinsky. Monica followed 30 years of more than a dozen accusations of rape and sexual assault. What made Monica special was that after denying the event, proof arose that he lied. It should make people start to wonder about all the other incidents. It starts to sound like Bill Cosby. How many times can you say the victim is just lying?

I should add that anywhere I have worked over the past 50 years, having sex on the boardroom table would be grounds for firing. Why is it that if the secret service can get fired for hiring a prostitute, the President should be excused for using the Whitehouse as a brothel. Character matters in a President no matter which party is in office.

@Jaxk I actually agree with you on this with regards to having to live with the consequences for your action and how it should be applied evenly from the top down.

Letting the prior charges leveled against Clinton go for right now and focusing on his relationship with Lewinsky; the problem was that it was really nobody elses business if she was ok with it and it was only the politicization of it that made it a circus. I wish I could say that I felt like the outrage expressed by the Republicans were genuine but I did not.

On the other charges of rape and assault, they needed to be addressed immediately after the occurrence. Had the first one been brought into a court of law then perhaps there would not have been a second, third or eleventh and certainly not a Lewinsky event. Perhaps they were swept under the rug or paid off or intimidation tactics employed and if so then that too is indicative of further problems within the system that need to be rectified.

The problem comes about with the system we have created where we do not punish our own indiscretions first then worry about the supposed sins of others afterward. But what we see is Democrats and Republicans either defending or ignoring wrongdoing from their own party members while wailing and gnashing their teeth over that of the opposing group. Both are guilty and we, the people, let them both get away with it.

I guess this is why we see an abysmal approval record for Congress while having a, what, 91% re-election rate.

It is silly at this point to be upset about sexual escapades on the part of politicians. Clinton just had the misfortune to be in office when such matters became fair game for discussion in the press. The fact is that sexual impropriety has been as dependable a part of the office of President as the State of the Union Address.

Politicians, sports stars, musicians, and anyone famous are role models, like it or not. Kids want to be like them. It may not be fair that they are held to a higher standard, but that is part of the burden of fame.

@filmfann Yes we do hold them to a higher standard, but they have a tougher time than the rest of us because they are confronted more frequently with a huge variety of tempting and (usually) willing desserts. It is just a basic truth that sex is an urge beyond fear or reason, and it is rather pointless trying to predict who among us will succumb to the pull in defiance of logic or common sense.

My religion, being basically The Boy Scouts of America, yes, very much so.

How can you seriously hold any right wing politician to any moral standard?

We have an expectation of certain standards of morality in this country. When you’re talking about the number one person in charge of the United States and they bust that morality expectation USING A CIGAR (ha ha!) it’s a let down. However, I do agree the media should not have broadcast it. They didn’t broadcast JFK’s liaisons. It really was none of our business. I’m sure Hillary handled him just fine.

I have to step back into a mindset I once held when I participated in the Catholic church and I would hold my President to a wider standard yet no higher standard than a clergy I had assigned my faith in my higher power with. Both I expect to be at the top of their game. I turned to my Priest to once a week re-center my mind towards what was important in my life and those who shared my faith. Pretty specific task.

My President I expect to do much more and that is to preserve my right to my faith and also lead and govern over all of the other aspects of my life, my ability to create and seize opportunities to provide for myself and my family and protect and not encroach upon my freedoms guaranteed by our Constitution.

No, not at all. They’re politicians, which means that they lied, cheated, and sold themselves in order to be elected. There is no such thing as an honest politician – there can’t be, because elections cost money and they don’t have it.

Even Obama, who I see as being one of the more honest, less scandal-free presidents, has had to compromise, no doubt, to be elected.

Sure, I would much rather have a person who keeps his/her word, and says things I agree with and can trust. But do I expect it? Not a chance.

Agnostic, here.
Hard on politicians and clerics alike.

Religion not withstanding, anyone who imagines that politicians are at best a small cut above a commen criminal is, in my opinion, a bit naive.

After seeing how some men of faith behave when not in front of a group extolling upon the sins of the flesh, but rather sampling the goods in private, I believe everyone is capable of anything to do with the physical aspects, if they so desire.
But to denounce others for the same actions they have in common?
No.
As far as political figures? More individuals who have held the office of President have had liaisons with individuals other than their spouses, more often than most would believe. “The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak.”
Is it anyone’s business? No harm, no story. MYOB.
Court the religious factions for votes whilst holding another type of court in the boudoir?
No.
I guess- do your job. Don’t be a hypocrite. Keep your mouth shut otherwise. And if you must- at least choose someone with some discretion, for crying outloud!
Everyone is human-some folks are just better at it!

I do hold the President to a higher standard and I was disappointed in Clinton’s behavior, including his choice of who to have an affair with, but since it was not hypocritical (Clinton was not a preacher of family values) and did not affect his ability to perform his job, it was just not a big deal. I put more blame on the Republicans for wasting my tax money on pursuing the matter.