> > > > I think you're still in awe and admiration of Gov. Sanford's luck > with > > Argentinean women (as if a rich or powerful guy needs any "luck" to > bag an > > > And yet this us actor... what's his name..... had to marry this > Argentinian waitress before he could "bag" her. Judging by where she > lives I'd say she's got her own money (or her ex's money for that case) > and is not needy, you know, upper shelf people. It's not like he is > taking advantage of his money, this affair will cost him dearly.
That it will. On the one level it's sad, of course, because if he were a Democrat this would likely be a resume enhancer. But he was supposed to be a defender of a higher standard and the cost of that when you screw up is always dearer than when you buck the standard openly. Incidentally, along these lines, I expect Obama to be a victim of his own self-righteous hypocrisy, especially on matters of fiscal responsibility. He criticized Bush for doubling the deficit over eight years, but he's already done that in his first six months. And promises "we ain't seen nothin' yet." > > Both blokes did wrong by any standard. > > > Nope, the first one just fell for the girl and listened to his heart > (at > least for 5 days), I think he was listening to a different organ. > and who are we to cast the first stone in these > matters of the heart? It is not casting any stones to point out a sin--the casting of stones has to do with judgment and punishment, and THAT is where we have to be careful. Even Jesus, after he got the adulteress off the target practice hook, presumably by scribbling all the infidelities of her critics in the sand, said to her point blank, "Go, and sin no more." So what she did WAS a sin. The issue isn't whether it's a sin or right/wrong to call it out as such, but rather one of forgiveness and repentance -- God's forgiveness is guaranteed if/when we are really repentant (this means we know and agree it's wrong), and He is always merciful, especially when man is hard-hearted. That's usually because only then are people genuinely repentant. Sanford's situation certainly seems "real" on a human level -- that is, he was genuinely head over heels in infatuation with the Argentinean woman, and genuinely grieved by his own error. This is a good place to be, healing-wise. Contrast this with the reaction of people like Frank, McGreevy, Clinton, etc., who consider their sins virtues and continue in their sin as if it is a right, and even flaunt it. Which of course it is their right, we have God's gift of free will, and are certainly free to exercise it as we want, while we have breath. But that doesn't mean once trust is violated, you have to trust again as if nothing happened. These kinds of sins related to sex and sexuality in particular are powerful because of the unhealthy soul ties they create, and the healthy ones they damage. The libertine notion of free love has wreaked a lot of havoc in the last several decades, and is responsible for many a fatherless child in the last two generations. - Bob _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
