Georgetown/On Faith

The Private Affair of Mark Sanford

JUST LAW AND RELIGION

by Michael Kessler

"I've let down a lot of people, that's the bottom line," declared South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford on Wednesday. Thus ended the fun media game, "Where in the World is Mark Sanford?" He was in Argentina, with his lover, over Father's Day, without having any contact with his wife and four children.

There was a time--the Clinton years--when such an admission would incite a political witchhunt. Indeed, then-Congressman Sanford called vocally for Clinton to step down, "The issue of [Clinton] lying is probably the biggest harm, if you will, to the system of democratic government, representative government, because it undermines trust. And if you undermine trust in our system, you undermine everything." As for Clinton, Sanford thought "it would be much better for the country and for him personally" to resign.

Sanford's press conference on Wednesday did not end with such a resignation. He began with recollections of "hiking the Appalachian Trail"--a term that will surely become a new slogan to describe the activity of hypocritical politicians who moralize against others while letting themselves get carried away by their own desires. He ambled along for a while with many apologies, choked up at moments, and then--after minutes of suspense--revealed the "bottom line is this, I've been unfaithful to my wife. I developed a relationship with a dear, dear friend in Argentina."

There was an almost welcome frankness to his tone that made him surprisingly appealing as a paradigm of crisis management--apologize to those who matter, state bluntly what happened, and move on to the disaster awaiting him at his (broken) home. Most thankfully, there was no phony staging of the tearful but loyal wife by his side (she was at their vacation home on Sullivan's Island, forthrightly--and even gracefully--declaring over the past few days that she had no clue where he was).

I will leave aside the question of his incredible irresponsibility in leaving the state unattended for a period of time so he could privately conduct his liaison. This was, undoubtedly, stupid, irresponsible, and unprofessional. Any number of crises could have emerged that needed a clear chain of command, and he was AWOL. Professional shame--and grave political consequences--should be heaped in his direction. It may be that his dereliction of official duties is sufficient grounds for him to step down and leave politics.

However, that's about the extent of my willingness to throw sticks and stones. As unfortunate as this "affair" has emerged to be, it is Sanford's business, and his wife's, and the few friends to whom he offered apologies. Surely we can see that he let a lot of people down--morally, paternally, matrimonially--but judging the affair and its aftermath is not our business. Sanford and his wife have "been working through this thing for the last five months," and clearly they have a lot more to work out...on their own.

Some--particularly my fellow progressives--may be ready to engage in schadenfreude at the fall of another mighty hypocrite in the party of "family values." There has been a perverted pleasure in the blogosphere discussing the intimate details of emails between Sanford and his lover. Doesn't he deserve this ridicule since he's one of those Republican moralists trying to tell everyone else what to do, and then violating that code of ethics in his own life?

In Sanford's case, this may be an overly simplistic judgment. Sure he heaped disdain on fellow politicians caught in affairs. But that was years ago--not an excuse!--but by some appearances he has moderated. Sanford can be distinguished from someone like John Ensign, who trumpeted his moral righteousness on many crusades, yet just announced that he had carried on his own affair with a staff aide and family friend. And certainly Sanford's record is lockstep conservative on a range of social issues, a record that is distressing for some, particularly in his denial of equality in marriage.

However, there may be a redeeming quality in his very public calls for the government to get out of citizens' private lives, often to the consternation of his fellow Republicans. He has seemed impatient with social moralizing (e.g. not signing a bill that would allow religious license plates and seemingly unfazed about Michael Phelps taking bong hits in his state).

He recently got into a very public debate with Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) after the recent South Carolina GOP convention. Graham mocked "Ron Paul libertarians" as unworthy leaders of the Republican party, saying "I'm not going to give this party over to people who can't win."

Afterwards, in a widely viewed interview, Sanford chastised Graham's derision for libertarianism: "There was almost a pejorative comment a moment ago. Sen. Graham spoke and said 'I'm not a libertarian,' whatever, whatever, as if that's an evil word. Liberty is the hallmark of the American experiment ... I've been accused of being a libertarian and I wear it as a badge of honor."

Likewise, in an "Ideas" piece on Politico.com after the Republican trouncing in 2008, Sanford charged that defending liberty should be at the core of the Republican mission: "while I believe there should always be a big GOP tent, there must also be a shared agreement on the essentials -- including expanding liberty, encouraging entrepreneurship and limiting the reach of government in people's everyday lives." (See also his recent interview with the Acton Institute).

Note that order--the core of the Republican party should be about expanding liberty and getting out of people's everyday lives. There is no mention of imposing moral views onto individuals, in the manner recently espoused by Newt Gingrich, who thought the first challenge for conservatives was to fight a spiritual battle for the soul of the nation. The GOP tent, on Sanford's watch, seems to be for less, not more, intrusion into personal lives.

And finally, there is his assessment in today's news conference about the role of God's law in our lives. Sanford turned it entirely toward his inner life: "There are moral absolutes and God's law is there to protect you from yourself. There are consequences. This press conference is a consequence." God's law is for an individual to follow and for them to confront when they fail. There's no call for imposing his view of God's law on the rest of society.

The consequences of this affair will be far-reaching. As a governor charged with the care of his state, he failed miserably and should be publicly judged and held accountable. Where he has been an opponent of liberty for others based on his own moral visions, the charge of hypocrisy should be carefully applied. Yet as a husband, father, and friend, the consequences of his indiscretions are going to emerge--rightly so--in that space between his conscience, his wife, his children, and his God. We don't have a seat at that bench of judgment.

Dr. Michael Kessler is Assistant Director of the Berkley Center for Religion, Peace, and World Affairs and Visiting Assistant Professor of Government at Georgetown University.

By Michael Kessler |  June 24, 2009; 5:02 PM ET

 | Category:  Just Law and Religion Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati  
Previous: Pope's Delayed Message on Greed | Next: Spiritual Counsel to the G8

Comments

Please report offensive comments below.



Athena, Athena, Athena,

Once again for your perusal:

"Ethics.

Wicca has but one law of action and ethics. It is called the Wiccan Rede or the Wiccan Law, and can be found under the Reading Room category of the same name. "And ye HARM NONE" covers almost everything that the Ten Commandments do: don't lie, don't steal, don't cheat, etc. It encourages us to strive not to harm any living thing - including ourselves - except perhaps to survive. Whether this means that you must become a vegetarian or a passivist is up to the individual. The Wiccan Law serves as a guideline to action, not a mandate.

The ONLY law that the Ten Commandments express that is not covered by the Wiccan Law is that of marriage AND ADULTERY. In Wicca, love itself is sanctified, with or without government authorization. As long as two individuals share a sincere bond of love that does not harm either party, it DOES NOT MATTER if they are legally joined, if they are heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, or interracial."

I agree that the families of both parties are being harmed but the official Wiccan rules, says DOES NOT HARM EITHER PARTY. It says nothing about the FAMILIES of SAID PARTIES. Wicca needs to expand said rules!!!! Until then, being a Wiccan would be a big asset to Mr. Sanford.

Posted by: ccnl1 | June 29, 2009 12:17 AM
Report Offensive Comment

In CCNL's attempt to be funny, he forgot about the one key phrase in his latest cut-and-paste follies: HARM NONE. His actions were harming his wife, his children, and the taxpayers of South Carolina. At least when a Democrat got caught with his pants down, he had the good sense to resign pretty much immediately.

Posted by: Athena4 | June 28, 2009 8:24 PM
Report Offensive Comment

If you truly believe in God and in the Bible as His literal Word, South Carolina needs to execute its Governor and his mistress:

"And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbor's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death."
Leviticus 20:10 (KJV)

If you don't agree with this as the true and holy word of God, stop cherry-picking other verses of Leviticus to judge and condemn others as your Jesus taught you not to do.

Posted by: coloradodog | June 28, 2009 10:40 AM
Report Offensive Comment

from: www.magicwicca.com/wicca/definition.html

"Ethics.

Wicca has but one law of action and ethics. It is called the Wiccan Rede or the Wiccan Law, and can be found under the Reading Room category of the same name. "And ye harm none" covers almost everything that the Ten Commandments do: don't lie, don't steal, don't cheat, etc. It encourages us to strive not to harm any living thing - including ourselves - except perhaps to survive. Whether this means that you must become a vegetarian or a passivist is up to the individual. The Wiccan Law serves as a guideline to action, not a mandate.

The only law that the Ten Commandments express that is not covered by the Wiccan Law is that of marriage and adultery. In Wicca, love itself is sanctified, with or without government authorization. As long as two individuals share a sincere bond of love that does not harm either party, it does not matter if they are legally joined, if they are heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, or interracial."

Maybe Mr. Sanford went a bit Wiccan and did not consider his other loves???

Posted by: ccnl1 | June 28, 2009 4:14 AM
Report Offensive Comment

The hypocrisy certainly damaged our nation, tying up the Clinton administration and paving the way for Bush to get elected by a bunch of people who were cheaters, themselves, on the very premise that only 'moral' people (ie, people with right-wing 'morality' ...for the little people,) could possibly be trustworthy or right about anything.

Until a Republican does it, of course.

Then it's defended and minimized, and the last thing the Right and the evangelicals will do, it seems, is take a real step back and look at what they've been doing.

My partner and I can't possibly get civilly-married because of some 'definition of marriage' ....and this guy can't even keep his own oaths with a press corps watching?

I really don't care much about his personal 'sins,' ...only how the 'culture warriors' minimize what *he* did while they were using politicians like that to mess up the country so many ways, and use denying other peoples' marriages as a moralistic excuse to do so.

This hypocrisy among religious conservatives in government isn't just a series of isolated incidents: it's a *pattern,* if not a *strategy,* (attack the morality of others, to somehow make people believe that if you're a homophobe and/or Republican or preacher you can't possibly be suspected of the very things you sought power railing against. )

Will religious conservatives look at this, and go, soberly, 'You know, this just keeps happening. Maybe we're not being *fair,* here, trying to tell other people what 'real marriage' is: it seems our own 'morality' policies don't even work in our *own* families.'

That'd take some real self-examination and real humility, though.

Posted by: Paganplace | June 27, 2009 9:32 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Living in South Carolina means living a life of political frustration - if you happen to be a democrat. Two ultra-conservative senators and now the maverick millionaire governor caught with his pants down.

He ran off in a tempermental pique looking for solice south of the border, when he was recently forced to take government stimulus money for the state - something he had refused to do until congress and the courts intervened.

Oddly, the man can't be impeached, according to state law. This is a fellow that had big aspirations for the presidency - apparently he's given to delusions of grandeur as part of his generally puckish view of electoral responsibility.

We can only assume that this fellow has been enabled by lying staff members and others close to the governor's office for quite some time - and well before the Argentina debacle.

It's refreshing when high profile politicians can keep their narcissism in check and avoid public scandals - unlike Bill Clinton, this guy is now a genuinely lame duck until the sun sets on his career.

So don't be too concerned for our governor and his future, because there's always speaking engagements, the inevitable book, more and more money, and Argentina to look forward to. But pity his poor wife.....

Posted by: persiflage | June 27, 2009 7:52 AM
Report Offensive Comment

The point is that Gov. Sanford condemned Clinton for his affair, and is guilty of the same thing. Even worse - Clinton did not use taxpayer money to conduct his affair. The other reason that Sanford is a hypocrite is because he talks about "respecting traditional marriage" in light of restricting the rights of gay people to marry, but didn't respect his own marriage. Eliot Spitzer was a hypocrite because he was "Mr. Law and Order" while patronizing prostitutes.

The other thing is that he was considering running for President, and was on McCain's short list for VP - and he's carrying on with a foreign national? I certainly hope that he wasn't planning on continuing the affair if he was in a position to have access to national security briefings?

Posted by: Athena4 | June 26, 2009 4:38 PM
Report Offensive Comment

First off, I think we need to view this situation for the private and public tragedy this is. I can see that many people are going to try to use this for political gain but when people betray our trust, it is not to anyone’s gain. I also was tempted when Spitzer was caught in his scandal to enjoy it, since I wasn’t fond of him as governor. In the end we need to remember that isn’t good when public figures lose their integrity. It hurts us all.
There are many statements in this article that aren’t quite accurate. Clinton wasn’t impeached for an affair he was impeached for perjury. I don’t think the governor was AWOL, just out of the public’s view. But there are 2 main things that caught my attention.
I don’t believe Sanford is a hypocrite because he messed up, even though it was a huge disaster for his life. I may change my opinion after more comes out but being a hypocrite is not just messing up. We all do that. Being a hypocrite is acting like you believe something when you don’t. It seems he was sincere in his belief but unfortunately, he wasn’t able to practice what he believed to his standard. Now he understands more than most why adultery is wrong. Again, I don’t see a hypocrite. I see a fallen man who wishes he could take his actions back.
It seems clear this author is just pushing his agenda. As opposed to advising us that we shouldn’t care about his “private” life, I think we should be trying to prevent this type of thing. There is a wife and 4 boys that have been hurt beyond measure and many supporters that are sick with him. This type of thing happens but it shouldn’t. Maybe instead of making jokes about our leaders failures we should be supporting them and praying for them.
I can also assure you this isn’t a private issue only. Of course his main focus is his wife and family but he hurt all in his state as well as county. Marriage is not a private institution. It is done before many witnesses and recognized by the state. It is the greatest promise a person can keep or break. It shows the integrity of a man. It will be a long time before anyone can trust him and it will affect his abilities as governor if he stays in office. This doesn’t even mention the financial cost in a time when we can least afford it.
My last point is that the author seems to think morality is mutually exclusive with liberty (“Where he has been an opponent of liberty for others based on his own moral visions, the charge of hypocrisy should be carefully applied”). I assure you that this is completely false and not what our founding fathers believed. In fact, if our laws aren’t based on morality, what are they based on? Our country was established on Moral Laws given by God. Our freedoms are based on a free will that our Creator gave us. We need to continue to search our real morality in spite of the fact that some will make mistakes. I hope this is the legacy from this event and not the opposite.

Posted by: kert1 | June 26, 2009 12:59 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Two other moralizers get caught with their pants down. "Respecting traditional marriage" indeed. I'm sure that someone out there is saying that it's all the fault of gay marriage, or the "breakdown of traditional values" or whatever. Don't let that fool you. It's nobody's fault but their own.

So then why can't two committed, loving people of the same gender get married?

Posted by: Athena4 | June 25, 2009 2:09 PM
Report Offensive Comment

He should pay the taxpayers back for the tens of thousands of dollars he's spent on his "travels".

And, as usual, the repubicans attempt to divert attention by citing past dem infidelities, but the list is a LOT longer on the repubic side! Whiners, poor sports, and finger-pointers, crawl back into the dank holes from which you have crawled. You lost, now get over it and stop whining.

And, wait a minute! The federal government was going to help bail-out South Carolina and not California?! This is madness. Everyone knows South Carolina's like Mexico, USA where ignorance and violence abound. Unbelievable. Let's give South Carolina to Mexico.

Al Gore gets into his personal plane because he is wealthy. It didn't cost taxpayer's money like your hypocritical governor's sexual junkets. He is fighting for global climate change and is anything but a hypocrite. I'm so sick of jealous repubicans, aren't you?

Posted by: elleyeyegreen | June 25, 2009 12:52 PM
Report Offensive Comment

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company