Congresscritters shalt not commit adultery

Among the many things that Congresscritters, male and female, ought not to do, adultery is high on the list. Even if you call it ‘open marriage’ or ‘polyfidelity’ or violate the terms and conditions of the English language by using the non-word ‘thruple.’ 

Why? Congressing is a job in which you are expected to swear an oath of office. Swearing a solemn oath is a big hairy deal! Throughout much of history folks worried if they swore a solemn oath and failed to keep it, they could expect some hellfire in their long-term future. They didn’t feel entitled to shrug their oathbreaking off with the insincere words ‘well, I tried.’ 

And marriage? It’s not a government benefits program for sex partners no matter how much some people want it to be. It is a covenant— another solemn oath you are expected to keep. The institution of marriage is also a major building block of any society. Marriage traditionally creates a home with a man and a woman at the center of it. Scientific studies have shown that these marriage-based homes provide a beneficial environment for the raising of children. Just look at children who have been raised in orphanages and the foster care system, and you will see there is no substitute. 

Now, when you are selecting a candidate to vote into Congress, you want someone who is going to take his oath of office seriously. And one hint is to see how well he has kept the other solemn oaths in his life. A person who is on record as having committed adultery, just like a person who has been convicted of perjury, is usually not a good choice.

Former congresswoman Katie Hill has been mislead by our sick society into thinking that the word ‘polyfidelity’ somehow makes adultery OK and gets her permission not to keep her marriage oath. She also thinks accusations of ‘abuse’ make her misdeeds all right. She is wrong, and that makes her resignation the right thing to do, but I’m afraid she will never know it and will think of herself as an innocent victim. 

Now, there have been even presidents of our country who are believed to have committed adultery while in office— the business with JFK and Marilyn Monroe being one example. Does that mean we should have rejected JFK from being our president (had we known?) No, we are allowed to forgive presidential (and congressional) sins. But it is far better when our nation’s leaders have the morals and the dignity to avoid adultery and other major violations of moral law. 

Marriage is the heart of our society— it’s where are most competent members of society are raised. Adultery, in the German language, is called ‘Ehebruch’ or marriage-breaking. Perhaps that’s where we get our concept of the ‘broken home—‘ a home which is destroyed by an annulment or divorce, which is in turn often triggered by adultery or suspicions of adultery. When a marriage is broken by adultery, a light goes out in our society. When enough lights go out, we have violence in the street and filled prisons because of all of the young people who come from ‘broken homes’ and don’t have the moral foundation or mental health to become contributing members of our society. 

Some people look down their noses at the ‘prudes’ who don’t want known adulterers elected or appointed into positions of power. ‘We should pick the best guys regardless of their private life,’ they say. But are they the best guys if they are adulterers? Or perjurers, thieves, bank robbers or serial killers? Would you vote a Jeffrey Dahmer into congress if he had good skills, or would you hold out for someone who had the moral values to at least not kill people?

Katie Hill says 'this isn't over' despite resigning over sex scandal