I halfway suspect youre writing this letter because you want specific people to read this column and deduce who is involved and whats really going on behind closed doors (without actually addressing the conflict in person). Thats not ethical, either.
This seems a little strange -- considering that "The Ethicist" went out and did print the letter in his/her column anyway.
I am not reading anything the slimes puts out
These people sound like Clinton wannabees....
I suppose it is interesting. Is it Petraeus's mistress' husband? Who knows? In a way it reminds me of Monica Lewinsky's parents, so enamored with Bill Clinton's so-called importance that they never seemed to be able to muster up any negative word about him.
It is another example of how, in a fallen world, politics and personal power trump everything. People will swallow anything, regardless of how fundamentally wrong it is, simply because political ends are more important than anything else. And in that context, ends are always more important than means. It is an alternative morality, a substitute for the truth.
It is nothing new, but in the modern world we have taken an additional step. It is worse than the sense that there is no shame attached to the behavior, but those who are harmed, i.e. this woman's husband, are said to be honorable. Not because he loves his wife and loves her unconditionally regardless of how painful it is, but because he does so for the greater political good. That is the sickness that turns political ideology (right or left) into religion.
So in other words, it's morally wrong to publically expose the affair... unless it's a Republican.
Libs (libertines and liberals) just can't own up to their own hypocrisy, can they?