The Qur'anic term "zina" covers both pre-marital relationships and adultery. Chapter 17, verse 32 says "Nor come near to zina: for it is shameful and an evil, opening the road (to other evils)." Other verses establish punishments for individuals who engage in extramarital relationships -- with greater punishments for the married person than the single.

However, this sin, like many, is only a matter for public interest, and punishment, when it becomes a public affair. The Qur'an has stringent witnessing requirements -- four people must witness the couple engaging in the act -- for it to become a matter of public concern. Thus it is not the private sin which is a criminal act, but the public flaunting of immorality. The probability that four witnesses could be found is further reduced by commands in the Qur'an not to spy on one another, to avoid suspicion, and to refrain from trying to catch each other out, especially in the privacy of one's home.

In fact, my professor of Punishment in Islamic Law at Harvard Divinity School told us that the witnessing requirements were so difficult to meet that there were no recorded cases of an individual having been convicted of zina on the basis of witnessing in the criminal records of any of the various Caliphates. The only way that anyone had been punished, he said, was through confession.

Of particular interest to me, was that pregnancy is not considered sufficient proof, despite practices in Nigeria, Iran, and Saudi Arabia, as it does not confirm the consent of the woman, and being raped is neither a sin nor a crime. Furthermore, the horrific situations we witness in places like Pakistan or Iran where a woman accusing a man of rape is subject to punishment of the crime of adultery if she does not provide four witnesses is a complete a travesty of justice and of Islamic law. The Prophet, when confronted with a case of rape, accepted the woman's testimony (there were no witnesses) and punished the man severely. The woman, it should be noted, suffered no consequences.

With regard to private sin, the Qur'an is adamant about individual moral responsibility. Chapter 6, verse 164 says, "Whatever sin any human being commits rests upon himself alone; and no bearer of burdens shall be made to bear another's burden." Add to that verse 2:256 which states, "There shall be no compulsion in religion" and it is clear we are not moral police for each other.

Furthermore, it is also clear that despite the strong injunctions against "zina," no sin except idolatry is unforgivable. One of my favorite hadith is narrated by Abu Dharr:

The Prophet said, "Nobody says: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah' and then later on dies while believing in that, except that he will enter Paradise."

I said, "Even if he had committed illegal sexual intercourse and theft?"

He said. "Even if he had committed illegal sexual intercourse and theft."

I said again, "Even if he had committed illegal sexual intercourse and theft?"

He said. "Even if he had committed illegal sexual intercourse and theft."

I said again, "Even it he had committed illegal sexual intercourse and theft!"

He said, "Even If he had committed Illegal sexual intercourse and theft, and despite Abu Dharr's not liking it."

(reported in Bukhari,Volume 7, Book 72, Number 717)

Having said all this, however, I also believe that public officials are subject to more stringent rules than the general public. People in positions of power can and do use their authority to coerce people under them in all sorts of ways, and we must protect those people to the best of our ability. Thus when Congressional pages came forward with claims of harassment and coercion, or altar boys accused Catholic priests of pedophilia and the Church of negligence in pursing action against those priests, the public is right to react with outrage and to demand resignations as well as prosecution.The Congress and the Church both needed to examine their policies and procedures to make sure that protection from and policing of such crimes is simple and accessible.

Even when nothing illegal has occurred, it is acceptable to hold public officials to a higher standard as they are role models. The Prophet taught that our rulers should be the best of mankind, as they set the tone for the society.

Particularly unpalatable is untruthfulness and hypocrisy. When I was a teenager, Gary Hart's infidelities were a major scandal. If he had said, "yes, I am having an affair, and I believe that's OK", or if he'd said he believed it was a private matter, not a public one, or even if he had acknowledge that it wasn't the best thing in the world, but he was only human, that would have been one thing. But he lied, and even went to far as to dare the press to catch him out. Which, of course, they did. To me, that was the unacceptable part. I could have forgiven him the affair, it was the arrogance and the lies, not to mention the stupidity, which made me decide I couldn't vote for him even though I liked many of his positions on issues. The personal sin of adultery, I could turn a blind eye to; that he lied to the public was only an indication that he was not a man I could trust to be president.

Similarly, with Clinton and Monica Lewinsky. If he had said, "Yes, I had intimate relationships with her, it was consensual, it was private, and while I'm not proud of infidelity, I am not perfect," I would have looked the other way; I would have accepted that every human has faults, including the president. It was the lying, the denials and the worming away from truth that made me lose respect for him. How many other things, important things, might he have lied about to the public?

As for religious leaders who preach sexual purity, especially when they do so vociferously and aggressively with much hyperbole about the sinner, then commit the very acts they preach against, I have even less respect for them. The depth of hypocrisy is simply unpalatable. If they had been mild preachers, focusing on human frailty and God's compassion for all, on His forgiveness for all, then that would be one thing; but the fire and brimstone preachers who commit the sins they rail against are very hard to stomach.

Despite the need to protect minors and subordinates, despite the moral standards we would like our public officials to live up to, I do think that there has been a great deal of unnecessary sensationalism around many of the cases. Julia Carson, who was my congresswoman at the time, said of Clinton that it was enough for her to know that he had had intimate relations, and that he had been untruthful about them, she did not need to know graphic details of the encounter. I agree with her. So too, I was more disgusted with the hype and rhetoric of some of the radio talk show hosts than I was with Clinton.