I was just reading about the book, and I came across an excerpt from it on npr.org.

Sanford lost me, as I mentioned in a recent post, when he compared himself to King David. As it happens, the excerpt on npr’s website mentions King David. Here’s an excerpt of the excerpt (the first speaker is David Coe, son of The Family’s current leader, Doug Coe):

“‘David. Hey. What would you say made King David a good guy?’ He giggled, not from nervousness but from barely containable delight.

‘Faith?’ Beau said. ‘His faith was so strong?’

‘Yeah.’ David nodded as if he hadn’t heard that before. ‘Hey, you know what’s interesting about King David?’ From the blank stares of the others, I could see that they did not. Many didn’t even carry a full Bible, preferring a slim volume of New Testament Gospels and Epistles and Old Testament Psalms, respected but seldom read. Others had the whole book, but the gold gilt on the pages of the first two-thirds remained undisturbed. ‘King David,’ David Coe went on, ‘liked to do really, really bad things.’ He chuckled. ‘Here’s this guy who slept with another man’s wife — Bathsheba, right? — and then basically murdered her husband. And this guy is one of our heroes.’ David shook his head. ‘I mean, Jiminy Christmas, God likes this guy! What,’ he said, ‘is that all about?’

‘Is it because he tried?’ asked Bengt. ‘He wanted to do the right thing?’….

‘That’s nice, Bengt,’ David said. ‘But it isn’t the answer. Anyone else?’

‘Because he was chosen,’ I said. For the first time David looked my way.

‘Yes,’ he said, smiling. ‘Chosen. Interesting set of rules, isn’t it?’ He turned to Beau. ‘Beau, let’s say I hear you raped three little girls. And now here you are at Ivanwald. What would I think of you, Beau?’

Beau, given to bellowing Ivanwald’s daily call to sports like a bull elephant, shrank into the cushions. ‘Probably that I’m pretty bad?’

‘No, Beau.’ David’s voice was kind. ‘I wouldn’t.’”

Coe goes on to say, “we elect our leaders, Jesus elects his…. If you’re a person known to be around Jesus, you can go and do anything. And that’s who you guys are. When you leave here, you’re not only going to know the value of Jesus, you’re going to know the people who rule the world.”

In other words, these guys believe they’re chosen by god to rule the world. Their moral lapses aren’t important.

Yes, indeed, it is an interesting set of rules.

Of course not. Truth is not objective. (Facts are, but they aren’t the same thing as Truth.)

and—”Except I’m still trying to figure out the whole dems v. repubs in moral failures. I don’t see the difference as some do.”

The moral failing—the cheating?—is no different, but many republicans heap a layer of hypocrisy on top of it because they take such public stances in opposition to exactly what they then get caught doing. You may think this makes what they do worse or not.

finally:—”So who is right? At the end of the day, people do whatever the hell they want.”

Y’know, I have to wonder about that. If they did, maybe later on this kind of thing wouldn’t happen. If they really, really did whatever the hell they wanted, would they really put themselves in a position where what they’re doing and what they have isn’t what they want? Of course, the problem is knowing what you want in the first place.

Your topic did raise a number of questions for me, though. Most notably, what is the nature of True Love (which you, I think aptly, took care to capitalize)?

What is True Love and who said it is more real, higher, or sincere than any other type of love (which he purportedly has for his wife)? No doubt you, I, and everyone else has their own working definition. But is it objective? Sometimes it just feels like we as individuals are playing by different rules of love (including some who think it has no rules/guidelines). One person says “of course he should pursue his mistress, that is True Love, his soulmate.” While another says, “love transcends infatuation and the commitment should always trump momentary (or unrequited) desire.”

So who is right? At the end of the day, people do whatever the hell they want. They may feign heeding advice or trying to adhere to objective standards of right and wrong, but people seem to always do what they want.

No real revelation, just thinking out loud I suppose. It just surprises me at all the variety of moral indignation elicited by an episode like this.

BTW, I am someone who was in Mark Sanford’s shoes for a spell, but went on the path of severing all ties with the other woman and began (and am perpetually in) the process of reconciliation. From my experiences, I think there’s good reason to question what sometimes presents itself as “True Love” and “soulmate.” I also know there are a multitude of reasons people initiate and end affairs, and most media coverage doesn’t care about this and likes to play armchair therapist with the whole thing.

stop reading aloud from his “Hello Kitty diary,” saying, “The rest of us are not supporting characters in your erotic adventure.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/03/shut-up-sanford-stewart-b_n_225360.html

But you have a point. How he handles his politics from here on will be interesting to watch.

I agree that you don’t choose who you love or when you start to love them and that such things are always more complicated than they may appear on the surface. However, I do think you should show someone enough respect to end your relationship with them before committing to another one. I realise that’s rather simplistic but I like to think that’s how I’d roll were I - squid forbid - ever in the same situation.