Should a politician be made to resign for having an affair?
The Labour Party was rocked by two scandal’s last month. One of these was the news of Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott’s extra-marital affair with his secretary.
Do you think individuals in positions of power and responsibility should be penalised for moral issues relating to their private lives, such as having an extra marital affair?
May 21st, 2006 at 8:07 pm
Morality can not be separated from an individual. What he actually is, is his morality. If he has no moral standards, how can he be expected to serve sincerely? If he is not sincere to the vows he has taken in the church at the time of wedding before his God, how can he be trusted to fulfil the vows to serve the country,its laws and constitution of the country? It is sheer humbug to say that personal life and public life, that is life to the nation, are two different and separate things. How can life to the public and personal life be different? A thief shall be a thief in public life as well; a cheater of the wife and his family shall be cheater to the public also when he has the necessity.
May 21st, 2006 at 11:24 pm
^^^ That is quite well put Ranjeet. I often hear this topic debated, and normally the “it doesn’t matter” brigade come out on top. But you make the point well.
May 29th, 2006 at 10:15 pm
yes I agree with the Dr.
June 10th, 2006 at 7:42 pm
Hari Bol.
Dr Ranjeet Singh Ji is absolulety correct. We are suffering because we are accepting mediocrity from our Leaders–if a person cannot honor their postion–they have a choice–give it up. We must not settle for second class, dishonorable religious leaders. If we have souless, morally bankrupt people as leaders–what do we expect our Samaaj to be??
June 22nd, 2006 at 4:51 pm
What absolute rubbish! Prescott getting jiggy on the side has absolutely no bearing on his abilities (or lack thereof) as a politician. We don’t pay him to be the guardian of social morality, we pay him to do a job. My question to the phoney, frustrated moral mafia is would they rather be operated on by a skilled surgeon who liked to sleep around or a rather lacklustre surgeon who was a faithful family man? We’re suffering because we accept mediocrity? No, we’re suffering because we have our priorities completely screwed up! Eat the mangoes, don’t count the stones (doesn’t quite work in English, does it?!)
July 12th, 2006 at 3:39 am
Didn’t know that “lacklustre” was a category of skill–next time I go to my MD–I’ll enquire about his “skills”.
Aren’t those who have little or no morality the ones with “screwed up priorities?” For example–the Hindu leader who abuses his wife at home and then goes out and preach on morality–are his priorities correct? Do as I say and not as I do???
Hmmm………..I didnt know that those who strive for morality in their own lives and expect same from those that choose to be leaders are “phoney, frustrated moral mafia!!”
I can assure you that many of us are neither phony nor frustrated even though we value morality and if that makes us a Mafia—poor you………want to join us……….
July 12th, 2006 at 3:14 pm
I agree - hypocrisy is a bad thing. However, as I said before, Prescott is not paid to be a guardian of moral standards; he is not a spiritual leader. It’s noteable that in former times, political rule was separated from moral and ethical leadership - Kshatriyas are not Brahmins and should not be expected to do fulfill both roles.