Thanks for a sane commentary on this issue. But isn't it Laura Betzig?

There's a connection between depression and cheating,did you know that? Is it ok to have depression and be a public servant? Not in my book. Sincerely-David

There is also a connection between stupidity and self-esteem. Is it good to be dumb?

OK. let's dispense with the morality and character issues (since they seem to be diametrically opposed to your so-called thesis). If Edwards' marriage vows were anything close to typical, they included a promise of fidelity. And even if they weren't typical, there was an implication of such there (which, as a lawyer, Edwards would probably argue is just as binding). Then he willfully chose to break that promise.

How is it that you do not recognize that this situation is absolutely analagous to saying one thing on the campaign trail and then doing something else once in office?

I disagree pretty strongly with most points in the article and the general ideology being espoused, but will use the last phrase of the article as a springboard for my comments:

"... something as irrelevant as a bit of wild oats."

At the grassroots, "in the kitchen" level of real life, "wild oats" are hardly irrelevant. Tell John Edwards' wife, who's battling cancer, that his wild oats are "irrelevant" and see what kind of response you get. While your at it, tell his kids as well, and the scores of others who are betrayed and bewildered and hurt or adversely affected in some way by these actions. Few things are more hurtful and damaging to the family and the very fabric of society than infidelity at any level, but especially adultery. Isn't keeping ones promises and vows important? Ask my kids... If I don't come through on even a little promise, it hurts them, and it damages the trust they have in me. Shouldn't we expect honesty, integrity, and fidelity in other people? Of course we should, and we should demand it from our representatives in government. I need to be able to TRUST those who govern me.

There is no activity in this world more loaded with meaning personally, physically, emotionally and ontologically than sexual activity. Nor is there any single action that can have more far reaching consequences at many different levels (personally, physically, emotionally, pragmatically, etc.) than sexual actions. Can we really say that a person with without integrity and fidelity at a level as personal as marriage and sex will somehow have integrity and fidelity in the political sphere? To call it irrelevant is crazy, in my opinion.

I think as a society we give sexual shenanigans a free pass because of an irrational, testosterone informed desire for personal sexual autonomy. Most of us are guilty of sexual betrayal in some way or another, so instead of passing judgement, which would indict ourselves, we gleefully delude ourselves with all this crazy-stupid rationalization. Meanwhile, families, children, relationships -- all the important things in life -- are disintegrating.

Instead of just letting all this slide, I think we need to try to CULTIVATE fidelity in ALL areas of life (marriage, relationships, finances, business); not pick and choose where we think it matters, because I don't think you can compartmentalize life like that. If someone is unfaithful in one area, how he or she be trusted in other areas?

Simple criterion needed to lead this country is with their brains, not their....emotions. Any two year old can behave powerfully. We need someone with compassion and frontal lobe capacity to run this country for the common world good, not selfish short term interests. How can we place the trust of our powerful nation in untrustworthy... hands? If the goal is evolution then lets look for leaders who don't live cave men existences.

In response to Beth:

In the words of a popular religious figure, "Then let he who has no sin cast the first stone." By judging people according to this moral thermometer, one's footing lies on a very slippery slope. As I am sure you will agree, no one in this world is free of wrong doing. At what point does this wrong doing affect the ability to run a country in as efficient and successful a manner as possible? The point of the article is to expound the author's point of view that infidelity is low on the totem pole in terms of skillset misgivings a politician or leader may have, and in fact generally show a parallel link to the testosterone these powerful men possess. A view I also believe to be true. However, I do not condone infidelity in any way, but does this affect one's practical ability to run a country, state, or municipality? No. Just remember moral compasses can be a slippery slope.

If evolutionary progress is the criterion for moral judgments, I fully agree with the author. Each person ought to do what brings him or her the most pleasure, and none of us should try to stop anyone else from this pursuit—unless it happens to threaten my own pleasure! If a wife or children are hurt, all that matters is the progress of the race.

If, however, we live in God's universe, then we know where the moral revulsion we all feel to such a scenario comes from.

The Bible already told the story of the perspective represented in the post above in the first chapter of Romans. The author has suppressed the moral law God placed inside him.

Life doesn't work within a worldview ruled by evolutionary psychology. Life in God's world only works when that God gives you a heart to live consistent with his character.

God commands all men everywhere to repent, the Bible says. God has also provided a way to be reconciled to him for our rebellion and idolatry. I urge you to read Romans chapters 1-3.