The Washington Post’s “On Faith” column has been devoted for the last week to the Eliot Spitzer fiasco. The question is, “What does the Eliot Spitzer scandal say about our public and private morality? Should he have resigned?” Among the respondents is America’s favorite collar-wearing atheist, John Shelby Spong:
My first observation about the Eliot Spitzer affair is that compulsive sexual activity is a human disease like compulsive gambling or compulsive drinking. It should be treated psychologically, but human beings seem to enjoy making moral judgments, especially when compulsive behavior appears in the political arena. Watching the mighty fall is viewed as a popular sport.
Spitzer was the highest public official in the state of New York, a man who had made his career prosecuting people for criminal behavior, including prostitution rings which are themselves notorious for financing other forms of criminality. He committed serial adultery, treated women as objects one buys, broke federal laws in his financial transactions, and betrayed the trust the public placed in him when it elected him as governor. But we must not, not NOT make a moral judgment upon his behavior. Moral judgments should always be left to those who are qualified to make them, people like John Shelby Spong.
Second, the Eliot Spitzer situation says that in this day of electronic eavesdropping behavior that once was private now quickly and easily becomes public. In 950 B.C. King Solomon, a powerful king, had a thousand wives. Is that much different? Presidents, including Thomas Jefferson, William McKinley, Franklin Roosevelt, Dwight Eisenhower, Jack Kennedy and Bill Clinton have all participated in illicit sexual relationships. Elliot Spitzer is no different.
Yep, it’s all the feds’ fault. They were invading people’s privacy, investigating violations of federal financial laws. How dare they! Spitzer, in spending hundreds of thousands of dollars for women in violation of prostitution laws, and in paying to transport women across state lines for the purpose of commissioning crimes, is no different from any other powerful man who had an affair. It’s not really any different from King Solomon. It is, like virtually everything else in John Spong’s world, just about sex, which means it really isn’t about anything important (except, of course, when it is the Most Important Thing in the Universe).
Is it admirable? No! Does it make him a bad governor? No!
One could argue that repeatedly breaking the laws that one is charged to uphold makes one a less than stellar office holder, but then violating the trust that comes with office has always worked for John Spong, so it isn’t surprising that he would endorse it in a politician.
People will quickly forget Governor Spitzer and his high priced prostitute will not even be a footnote in history.
Which, if God is merciful, is something that we will be saying about John Spong in the foreseeable future.
UPDATE: Welcome to those of you who are coming from CNN (it isn’t many, but I can dream, can’t I?).
Posted by David Fischler 
