And now General Petraeus, a four-star general, former commander of American forces in Afghanistan, former director of the CIA. Really?
As another adulterer bites the dust and joins the ranks of Bill Clinton, John Edwards, Tiger Woods, and Arnold Schwarzenegger, the usual debate swirls around. Should this transgression in their private life be any of our business? Does adultery make someone unfit for public service or office?
Without a doubt General Petraeus is a brilliant military leader who has earned the respect and admiration of many Americans. He holds a Ph. D. from Princeton. He is widely credited for implementing the “surge” in Iraq that marginalized Al-Qaeda. A year ago Congress unanimously voted to confirm him as director of the CIA. Many have suggested we should overlook his adulterous affair so as not to lose such a valuable public servant. He, however, has taken responsibility for his actions and apologized to his family, Congress, and the nation. On November 9, he resigned as Director of the CIA. But should he have?
Yes. Although some claim that his adultery is a matter of private sexual morality, they are wrong. Adultery, unlike fornication, breaks marriage vows that were made in public. The newspaper that will exploit the adulterous scandal may have run an announcement of the couple’s engagement and wedding. Those who attend a wedding, especially the groomsmen and maids of honor, are present as witnesses to couples’ public promise to be faithful to each other. No other promise a man makes is as solemn and sacred. The failure to keep this promise puts into question his ability to keep every other promise. The issue is not his sex life; it is whether he has the integrity to keep his vows and whether he will keep them when no one is looking. Just as embezzlement is about more than liking money, adultery is about more than liking sex. It is about being unworthy of trust.
Yes again. Although many adulterers in the hall of shame were brilliant (Clinton was a Rhodes Scholar), many wondered how they could have been so stupid to think they wouldn’t get caught. The answer is something more dangerous than stupidity—it is arrogance. Many simply became intoxicated with their power and the belief that a different set of rules applied to them. And hypocritically these men tolerated behavior in themselves that in their wives would have outraged them. Some colleagues at my college have argued that this failure in personal morality can be isolated to one area, but I would argue that hubris, arrogance, or the proud delusion of privilege can never be isolated—that it eventually infects all of one’s character.
And yes again. Is it dangerous for the CIA Director or, for that matter, any important public official to have an affair they desperately want to keep secret? Of course, because the discovery of that secret can make them a target of blackmail and manipulation. When the one having the secret affair is the Director of the CIA, the danger is not just to the cheater, but to national security. I must admit this point would be negated if Petraeus had been more like some French public figures who openly take mistresses, but it would still bring into question his good judgment. Wisdom is important for leadership and Petraeus has revealed a shocking lack of it.
And yes again. Petraeus is a father. No matter how successful a man may be in leading other men, his first responsibility is to lead his family as a father. Adultery is not just cheating on a spouse; it is cheating on your children. As a leader, Petraeus failed to do his duty to protect his children from shame and failed to set an example they can emulate.
My greatest concern regarding adultery in our leaders is something difficult to prove. During the investigation and impeachment of Clinton for lying about his affair with Monica, pundits were puzzled by polls that showed Clinton’s approval rating had risen slightly—even among women. Apart from all their legislative and political achievements, our leaders present the nation with an example that should make us want to be better than we are. Our leaders should make us aspire to a higher standard of integrity and achievement. But I think a leader’s public moral failure can make many feel better about themselves. Some may say, “Sure, I’m cheating on my wife—but heck, even presidents do that.” After all, if a four-star General can’t say no to adultery why should we expect that anyone can?
Some (I know who you are) may be disappointed that I have gotten to the end and not used the s-word. No—the other one: sin. I am not like those who mourned the stupidity of Clinton’s affair with Monica, but were afraid to say it was morally wrong—that it was sin. Adultery is sin, and I suspect Petraeus spoke his wedding vows before God—not just people. I fear, however, that if we begin punishing the sins of everyone we have elected, we would not know where to begin—or where to end. We might end as a nation without government. My argument is that adultery is a kind of sin that brings into question the integrity, humility, and wisdom of a leader. It is not just an issue of private morality, but one of public trust.
