“God’s Law” and Mark Sanford’s DIY Consequences
Eric Erickson tries to recover from Blue Texan’s sound thumping of him yesterday by excusing Mark Sanford’s adultery and lying because he has no Bible Study group:
We live in a fallen world and we ourselves are fallen. I am disappointed in Sanford, but not angry. The default for politicians seems to be unchaste. All we can do is work for ideas and try to find men of good character to fight for those ideas.
I think one thing I have noticed in the past five years is that Democrats and Republicans tend to elevate politicians to such a level that there is no accountability. It is insular. There is no support group, no small group of friends, and no authority that can guide, admonish, and correct politicians privately.
We have each other. I’m off in a bit to hang out with friends from my Bible Study. Sanford probably has none of that. I’m sure John Edwards did not. Nor Bill Clinton. Nor John Ensign. [my emphasis]
What he appears to have missed–even from Sanford’s own press conference–is that Sanford does have a Bible Study group.
Did your wife and your family know about the affair before the trip to Argentina?
Yeah. We’ve been working through this thing for about the last five months. I’ve been to a lot of different–I was part of a group called C Street when I was in Washington, it was a Christian Bible study of some folks that ask Members of Congress hard questions that I think were very very important. I’ve been working with them.
Problem is, it is populated with a bunch of other sanctimonious Conservatives who believe that their power matters more than the empty vows they mobilize to wield that power. I’m just waiting to see who’s the next member of "the Family" to tearfully confess to being a complete moral hypocrite while condemning others. Who will it be? Sam Brownback? Tom Coburn? Jim DeMint?
Which brings me to–far and away–the most annoying part of Sanford’s press conference: his attempt to validate his moral absolutism even while confessing he fell afoul of it.
But I am — I am here because if you were to look at God’s laws, there are in every instance designed to protect people from themselves. I think that that is the bottom line with God’s law — that it’s not a moral, rigid list of dos and don’ts just for the heck of dos and don’ts. It is indeed to protect us from ourselves. And the biggest self of self is, indeed, self. That sin is in fact grounded in this notion of what is it that I want, as opposed to somebody else.
[snip]
But I — I guess where I’m trying to go with this is that there are moral absolutes, and that God’s law indeed is there to protect you from yourself. And there are consequences if you breach that. This press conference is a consequence.
[snip]
And as a consequence, I hurt her. I hurt you all. I hurt my wife. I hurt my boys. I hurt friends like Tom Davis. I hurt a lot of different folks. And all I can say is that I apologize. I — I — I would ask for your — I guess I’m not deserving of indulgence, but indulgence not for me, but for Jenny and the boys. You know, there are a team of cameras and crews and all those sorts of things camped out down at Sullivan’s Island. And I would just ask for a zone of privacy, if not for me, for her and the boys.
As we go through this process of working through this, there are going to be some hard decisions to be made, to be dealt with. And those are probably not best dealt with through the prism of television cameras and media headlines.
[snip]
You know, I’ve tried to think of…one of the first steps is clearing out more time as we go through this process of reconciliation and figuring out what comes next. I’m going to resign as Chairman of the Republican Governors Association. I’m going to tender my resignation — one, because I think it’s the appropriate thing to do given other governors across this nation and my role as Chairman of the RGA, and two frankly just from the standpoint of time. You know if I think about this process, now it doesn’t begin at a family level it begins with a family of South Carolinians, and so that means me going one by one and town by town to talk to a lot of old friends across this state in what I’ve done and be asking their forgiveness, and that’ll take time, time I probably can’t devote to the RGA. [my emphasis]
There is such a thing as "God’s law," Mark Sanford says. For other people–for two men who love each other deeply, for example–it means they cannot live together, even if that means the opposite of what Sanford defines as sin, selflessness. But for Mark Sanford, the kind of guy with his own Bible Study group of adulterers who hold power through invoking moral absolutism, here’s what "God’s law" means, in terms of consequences:
- An uncomfortable press conference–though if you’re a good forgiving Christian, you’ll give his family (and by association, him) a zone of privacy from this point forward
- Inflicting pain on his wife and others
- Resignation from the Chair of the Republican Governors Association (though, to be fair, he doesn’t identify it as a consequence for his actions)
The consequences for two men who love each other under God’s law? They must do without love, no matter how selfless, as well as suffer the status of second class citizens.
The consequences for Mark Sanford (South Carolina’s existing law against adultery notwithstanding, because unlike prohibitions on gay marriage, no one seems to want to talk about that law)? A painful press conference (but please! a zone of privacy from here on out!), the suffering of others, and a setback to his personal career. But if you ask him whether those consequences would include his present livelihood and power, he’ll just walk away as if it’s out of the question.
To make it worse, Sanford is one dripping schmaltzy romantic:
I better stop now least this really sound like the Thornbirds — wherein I was always upset with Richard Chamberlain for not dropping his ambitions and running into Maggie’s arms.
Sanford believes in the primacy of love, in the mini-series law that love should take precedence over all else. Just not for everyone.
If you’re a member of "the Family," you see, you apparently get to decide when life should be like the Thornbirds and when it shouldn’t. You get to decide the consequences for love under "God’s law."
Erick Erickson thinks that Sanford just needs a nice Bible Study group, where he can have some private accountability, where Governor Sanford can pay consequences he believes in inside a zone of privacy.
But this DKos diary has it right, IMO.
I can’t imagine the coverage of Mark Sanford’s affair makes you feel very good. A recent hysterical and childish rant on your site screams at us that we don’t get to judge Sanford for his adultery. But you know something? We’re not.
We couldn’t care less about Sanford’s affair. It’s none of our business. We hope the media leaves his family alone, and we don’t relish their pain one bit. They have our sympathy.
Gov. Sanford, on the other hand, does not have our sympathy. Not because of his adultery, but because of his hypocrisy. You want the gloating to stop? Then get your fucking noses out of our bodies and our bedrooms.
[snip]
As long as you guys think it is your business and your right to try to force the rest of us to conform to the sexual mores of your particular perversion of Christianity, you can expect to get your noses rubbed in it with relish and glee every time you show that you don’t think the rules you want to apply to everyone else should apply to you.
Mark Sanford wants to reinforce his own sanctimonious power, even in his moment of shame. And the Erick Ericksons of the world want to enable that, with private accountability rather than moral consistency.
All the more reason to refuse to let that happen.
Update: Susie’s friend makes a good point.
But this whole ’seeking forgiveness thing’ needs to be cast in a larger, more meaningful context.
In all the ‘did he stand up like a man and admit his sin” and ‘did he get forgiveness from Christians with regard to breaking one of God’s absolute laws’, I predict we will see far too little about how this sinning Christian takes positions that do actual damage to other human beings who, to him, are mere abstractions. That is a bigger sin than adultery … a bigger transgression of ‘god’s absolute laws’. He has cast vile, evil and dire consequences on ‘the least among us”…. but where were the media then, where are they now on this horrendous sin?
Great post, as always! I am forever amazed at this sanctimonious bunch who invoke “God’s Law” whenever it is convenient but ignore it when it is not. As you note, it is not so much the adultery — we are all human. It is the thought that these are people who are supposed to be leaders, setting a better example for others to follow. Instead, it is “Do as I say, not as I do…”
It does make you wonder… In the meantime, others like John Cornyn — pledging to support Normie Coleman all the way to the Supreme Court — make my skin crawl. Cornyn would be screaming the loudest if Franken were contesting the election.
There are many shades of hypocrisy…
The sanctimonious hypocrisy is suffocating from these people.
Lordy, their personal lives must be a torment.
The GOP can and has rewrote US law to benefit themselves…rewriting Gods law for the same reason seems to be tougher.
Thou shalt not commit adultry.
Those one line laws without exceptions or footnotes or discussions of what “shalt” means in this context seem to be giving the GOPers real problems.
On a side note, you DO realize that everytime a reputable publication quotes or references Erickson, a Devil gets his horns?
Boxturtle (But an angel gets his wings everytime you make him look the fool, so it’s a trade off)
They use “moral” issues to divide the voting populous to win elections (or not) and then fail to live up to their own standards. And do unto others and all that just doesn’t really seem to sink in with these people.
More focus on public infrastructure and less on the voyeuristic, personal stuff would be a novel change from the Republicans.
Stole this Jon Stewart comment from HuffPo cuz it sums this up so well:
Peterr wrote a telling article on Jenny’s dog whistles.
Yeah, that was an amazing post.
The only consolation in this is that is unmasks, one more time, the great hypocrisy and cognitive distortions behind most everything the neo con movement does. I truly believe if their were such thing as “the devil” it would look just like a group of praying neo cons, who in my humble opinion take the “word of god” and twist it to support them as they get rich and exploit people (cause then you can do more for god), have affairs themselves, and be closet homosexuals (nothing a few prayers in church can’t fix), and finally so they can point self righteous fingers at others (we know the truth and god better than anyone else so don’t question us when we twist stuff around to benefit our evil ways).
Personally, I believe the devil is a creation of the human brain for the sake of projecting fallibility onto some thing “out there” that leaves too many folks with a way out of accountability. just saying…What would happen if human beings actually accepted responsibility for ineffective choices instead of blaming it on the devil?
As EW wrote “inflicting pain on his wife and others.”
The Gov. felt compelled to run down that list, in order, naming pain inflictees as:
1- “her” (the mistress)
2- “you all” (the press?)
3- “my wife”
4- “my boys”
5- “my friends like Tom Davis”
Nice that everyone else takes a back seat to the mistress. To Sanford’s credit, he did name the wife first in a prior apology.
As for not having a Bible group to keep him on the straight and narrow, did anyone ever figure out why ’spiritual giant’ Cubby Culbertson was called out by name? Slate reports that Cubby has recently hosted Sanford at Bible study.
And is it usual for a ’spiritual giant’ like Cubby to attend a hastily thrown together press conference in the state capitol building?
FOX received Hampton’s letter about Ensign 3 days before they admitted.
FedEx tracking and all…tee hee!
Trying to make sense out of the “morality” of these screaming neurotics, as they go through the convolutions of dealing with their own humanity, is a tough row to hoe. Especially since so many of them are slathered with hypocritical shit.
Likewise, chasing after the Great White Whale of moral absolutism, when you’ve got a conservative mind and a librul dick (As Jon Stewart puts it) is harrrd chasing.
Incidentally, Sanford as metaphor for an imploding republican party is what’s for lunch for them.
Eat, people! We want you should eat.
While I’m at it, these dominoes falling are worth far more to us than getting Dick Cheyney eating off a metal tray in some ClubFed. They are steadily eroding the very ground that spawned Bush, Cheyney, and their SS-Lite.
Between all that time for retail politicing he intends to do, and the time necessary for his family and sappy Bible study, just when the hell is he exactly going to attend to his duties as Governor? This man is a train wreck and needs to be removed for the good of his state just on emotional stability grounds, even independent of the violations of trust he has committed to the state.
So how come Spitzer had to leave office immediately? Because he’s not a Republican?
he needs to resign the guv’nuh-ship .. and abscond to argentina .. reuniting himself with his newfound tru-luv …
if he’s been conflicted enough to run off to south america with all that entailed .. he’ll be one miserable s.o.b. for the rest of his born days if he doesn’t ..
and he’s political toast here anyway .. period ..
Great essay and spot on.
Yes, it was very generous of Sanford to lay out his consequences for himself. It showed a lot about his mind set and that of his kind.
I hate seeing all of this dominating the news though. I hate the way the cable channels grab hold of issues like this and just won’t let it go when there are so many other issues critical to our daily lives that are given little or no coverage.
One other thing — I have been wondering how the emails were uncovered and who gave them to the press. If it was done by someone who somehow had legal access to his email, that’s one thing, but if they were uncovered by some kind of surveillance, that really bothers me, whether it was Mark Sanford or anyone else.
Well, one way to look at it is that the Republicans, who were so adamant about invasion of privacy not being a big deal, may have a change of heart now that they have little control over how the Big Brother tools are used. The assholes were too blind to realize that they have probably created their own worst nightmare.
“Yeah, we’ve been working through the thing for about the last five months…I was part of a group called C Street when I was in Washington, it was a Christian bible study that asks members of congress some hard questions that I think are very, very, important. I’ve been working with them.”
Some hard, very important, questions that have not been publicly asked, by anyone, so far:
Governor Sanford: were you porking your girlfriend while you were “working with them”?
I mean, it sounds like you were, time-wise, and that raises the question of how effective was your attending the bible study group. And could you tell us what “hard” questions they asked YOU, while you were in congress, or are they too important to be spoken of publicly?
I’ve read a few of the emails between you and your paramour, and you sound like a couple of people who, if they’re not in love, are damn sure up to their ears in lust.
They were kind of like that “thy breasts are as pomegranates” thingy, in The Song of Songs, in the BIBLE, of all places. Did she read that to you, between…you know…? That might have been comforting.
As for Sanford’s “shlocky romanticism”; I’m glad that when he saw “The Thornbirds” he wanted Richard Chamberlain to drop his priestly ambitions
(and his cassock) and to jump Meggie’s bones. To me, that’s a very human reaction to Father Ralph’s repressive, neurotic, self-denial of the fact that he’d found the love of his life.
That literary allusion was the most interesting thing in Sanford’s presser, to me. I felt, momentarily, a twinge of sympathy for him. That it evaporated as soon as he, paradoxically, retreated back into the bible-zombie closet, doesn’t cancel the fact that for a moment, Sanford had a flicker of perception and courage about dealing with his own desires, and (vain hope, evidently) a bit of enlightenment about passing judgement on others, before he re-joined hands with the pinheads and gay bashers and instead of standing up for his own humanity, went back to fondling the cold, hard, granitic, absolutism of the Ten Commandments.
At some point, these people are going to have to realize that human morality is a work in progress. They will not succeed at just slapping the table and saying:
“That’s it. Game over. No more investigating or equivocating. It’s sinful, or it aint. The in-between areas are too painful and troublesome to think about.”
And trying to engineer that tunnel to nowhere is causing all of us unnecessary misery.
.
In my experience that realization is only for themselves or their inner circle. The rest of us are just sinful and only redeemable by admitting to their superiority.
Religion loses it’s whole purpose if it doesn’t separate us from them.
Aside from these “prayer circles”, blackmail is the common link in the two affairs. Has anyone answered who gave the e-mails to the State?
Here I go, agreeing with BMaz@12…sorta/kinda. :o)
Sanford has 18 months left. He’s gonna be the lamest lame duck in the history of S.C. His infidelity-hypocrisy (or, to be accurate, getting caught for it) comes on top of his “I’m-a-different-breed-of-conservative!” grandstanding as he undoubtedly was positioning himself for a run in 2012, and the slap-down from the S.C. supremes over his attempt to “protect” S. Cackalack from the pernicious efforts of the “Union government’s” carpet-bagging to corrupt our educational system with giga-millions, highlighted his political lunacy; a complete mis-judgement of how stupid and conservative are the people of South Carolina.
We are not THAT stupid and conservative.
But, as we watch the republicans deal with what looks like an impending “trial separation” between the bible-zombies and the Wall St. goopers (and deal with it like that bunch of rhesus monkeys in a zoo, furiously slinging shit at each other) it’s hard for me to want to see Sanford and Ensign and their ilk go away. (Same thing with Palin. I have ZERO fear of her running in 2012. In fact, I would get down on my knees and thank Jaysus if the GOP is suicidal enough to nominate her in 2011. :o) )
At this point in our political situation, these people are, pardon the expression, a godsend for progressives. For every one of them clinging to office, it means there will be no room for genuinely “moderate” republicans to begin gathering power.
We had a bitter fight last primary season, between Obama and Clinton. How well we came out of that remains to be seen, but I will guarantee you, that the republicans are going to be tearing each other to pieces in 2012. The flat-earth bible-zombies vs. the stock-portfolio GOP is going to be THE spectator sport for at least a couple of years to come.
(I can hardly wait for DriftGlass’s photo-shoppes…:o) )
I dunno; anything could happen with Sanford. He might resign willingly, or be forced to resign…I don’t think the legislature has the will to force him out for getting caught fucking around on his wife. Too many of them are at risk for the same thing.
Having him to kick around, or not: I could deal with it, either way. :o)
Man, are you right about being a lame duck. He has been clobbered just as hard, and maybe harder, by Republicans in South Carolina. Also appears that a decent sized chunk of the political GOPs never liked him all that much. Pretty weird scene they got going there, but I sure don’t see where he has any governing coalition, power or ability whatsoever.
BrendanX; Sanford has aggravated a lot of powerful people down here, including some leaders of his own party. Asking who ratted him out, you’d need to make a list, put it on a wall, and throw a dart at it.
In fact, you’d probably need a handful of darts.
But the Columbia State, for more than a decade, has been turning into one damn good muck-raking journalistic crew. They’ve gone to court to enforce the “sunshine laws”, or threatened to, a bunch of times. No accident that it was one of their reporters who caught up with Sanford at the Atlanta airport.
And of course, talking about how “forthright” Sanford was, for holding that presser, is nonsense. The world was about to fall on his head.
What kind of e-mail account was it and who would have access to it?
JohnJ, but don’t you think we’re making progress in exposing their outrageous hypocrisy? I mean, yesterday, in an AP article on this little soap-opera, they noted, mid-piece, that Sanford had voted for 3 of the 4 articles of impeachment against Bill Clinton, and that he had talked about “moral legitimacy”.
That simple but oh-so-relevant fact is the kind of thing that you usually need to come to some place like Marcy’s, to read.
Didn’t catch that part, thank you. I get very little computer time in my current situation and have to rely on the synopses provided here instead of in depth reading. I regrettably miss a bit that way.
I was making more of a sardonic comment on the faux-religious that use religion as a weapon. As an example; I love using Jerry Falwell as an example of how important yet hard it is to deal with the Taliban.
from nytimes:
“…The governor, who raised his national profile by opposing the Obama administration’s economic stimulus plan,…”
guess sanford had enough stimulus.
BMaz; as an effective governor, you nailed it; he’s done for.
The problem is, more recently, the S.C.’s governor’s role is somewhere graven in stone as: “Don’t rock the boat!” And the legislators might be delighted to have a year-and-a-half of dealing with a governor who’s practically neutered himself. :o)
BrendanX; good question. I don’t know, but these days, we all know that “private emails” can be turned into public emails.
It almost had to be an inside job. Wouldn’t there be passwords and firewalls up the gum-stump?
Computer-wise, it’s above my pay grade.
One problem for conservatives:
They don’t understand that lust and love are both part of a continuum.
Or maybe they understand it, and it frightens them.
Writing Elizabethan sonnets to your partner is OK, just don’t talk dirty to her/him when you’re getting into the short rows. :o)
I actually only read one of Sanford’s emails. What I read as an expression of affection and attraction was not bad. There was a sincerity to it that somehow, embarassed me, to be reading it. I felt like a voyeur.
And then I remembered the joy of the conservatives as they lovingly fondled every word and act of Bill Clinton’s infidelity with Monica.
“Prurient” doesn’t begin to describe it. I think they hated him mostly because he had the…moxie…to sneak a few BJ’s in the White House.
Ha, a family friend worked in the Roosevelt White House, (yes he unquestionably knew weeks ahead about Pearl Harbor), she told many stories about his doings. Clinton just choose a big mouth…oops, no pun intended; but a good one anyway
JohnJ: no problemo. I think you’re spot-on about the “us and them” aspect of religion…and that sanctimonious self-righteousness is one reason why so many american voters were scared shitless about the prospect of Sarah Palin being one 71-year-old heartbeat away from the presidency.
And happily enough, I don’t think that fear is going to go away. :o)
Sanford Cites Secretive Christian Group’s Role in Helping Confront Affair
http://www.usnews.com/blogs/go…..ffair.html
Mark Sanford’s news conference today was unusual for lot of reasons, but here’s a less obvious one: The South Carolina governor referred to “C Street,” a Washington dormitory for lawmakers funded by a highly secretive Christian organization called the Fellowship. ( The Fellowship is the group behind the National Prayer Breakfast, where President Obama rolled out his Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships earlier this year. )
It’s rare for elected officials to publicly allude to C Street or to anything affiliated with the Fellowship. But here’s the exchange between Sanford and a reporter:
QUESTION: Did your wife and your family know about the affair before the trip to Argentina?
SANFORD: Yes. We’ve been working through this thing for about the last five months. I’ve been to a lot of different—as part of what we called “C Street” when I was in Washington. It was, believe it or not, a Christian Bible study—some folks that asked members of Congress hard questions that I think were very, very important. And I’ve been working with them. I see Cubby Culbertson in the back of the room. I would consider him a spiritual giant. . . .
The Associated Press wrote about the Fellowship in 2003. Interesting to note that Sen. John Ensign, who admitted to an extramarital affair, is also closely affiliated with the group and is a resident of C Street.
It looks like this “C Street” is more of a Penthouse Forum confessional than a “religious” group.
Does anyone take notes on their meetings and submit them?
If you read the article in Harpers “Jesus plus nothing”
http://www.harpers.org/archive/2003/03/0079525
it becomes very clear that the philosophy of this group has nothing to do with the teachings of Jesus and has everything to do with power and money. The leader “coe” I think, or his son says as much if quoted properly in this article. He basically says is it wrong if you cheat and commit crimes in services of Jesus? Well no it doesn’t if you are serving Jesus which of course in thier eyes is getting more power.
It becomes clear from the article that the philosophy of this group is the ends justify the means and group members are chosen by god. This is a very convenient philosphy if you want to ammass great power and have an excuse to break the law of the land as well as that of morality in order to get it.
This is a dangerous philosophy that explains the Bush Administrations constant willingness to engage in illegal activity. I would not be surprised if every last one of them was a member of this organization. They think they are above the law because god has chosen them. This is very disturbing. I just glad Cheney is nowhere near the direct levers of power or we would surely have invaded Iran by now.
The definition of marriage has been expanded. Marriage is now between a man and a woman AND a woman in Argentina, who is also married.
What if you end up with a woman/women who believe that conversely marriage should also be between a woman and two men? Would that be just hunky-dory too?
Sanford was a activist trying to get the 10 Commandments posted in public places. Now we know why — he can’t remember all of them.
JohnJ@32: “It looks like this “C Street” is more of a Penthouse Forum Confessional than a religious group.”
I mean, really. :o)
Again, what are the timelines for Sanford (and Ensign’s) learning curve?
Specifically, how long did it take for them to comprehend the error of their sinful ways, and then, to stop screwing around on their wives?
If it was cold-turkey-24-hours, then they’re on to something; but if the slippin’ and slidin’ (as Little Richard put it…) kinda dragged out for a few months (and I’m bettin’ it’s the latter. :o) ) then their time spent with the C Group was essentially a palliative balm for any guilt they may have felt, and in that case Sanford shouldn’t be singing “Hosannah!” about how it clarified his murky sense of right and wrong.
Incidentally, I’d still like to hear some of those “hard questions” that they were asking the congresscritters. Dare we speculate?
Oh, lets. :o) :
C Group Torquemada-Lite:
“Hi, Congressman Blivet! Been gettin’ any strange lately?”
In the unlikely event that Blivet responds: “Hayull yeah! More ass than the toilet seat in the women’s room at Sans Souci!”, did the C Group instantly follow up with: “Then your attendance is required at our little meetings, or we’ll send your wife an email or three about those 16 hour workdays and that four day junket to Acapulco with your long-legged, high-assed secretary.”
And:
“Aha, Senator Cialis! Good to run into you, hiding out in the Senate Cloakroom. Is it true that the runner-up in the Miss Slingshit, Texas contest has been hired as your new secretary, despite the fact that she can type 8 words a minute, and that some nights she stays over and sleeps on your office bed, to catch up on her work? You don’t have to answer, but here’s our card, and we’ll expect to see you, too, at our little bible study group…capiche?”
The problem is, all of the zealots think they, and ONLY they, know Jesus’s agenda. And interpreting it as:
“What’s good for the Dow-Jones is good for amurka and God!” leads to all manner of problems, in terms of money (see the economic situation) and wars.
(See the ongoing body-parts flying through the Mesopotamian and Afghanistan air.)
But it’s good that we have some sharp people like Marcy, and in this thread, Ms. Anna, helping to watch the watchers of our morals. You could even say: “It’s God’s work!”. :o)