I find the idea that Romans had fidelity as a virtue hilarious. I mean, maybe men were less likely to cheat with other women, but...
YES. Romans talked about fidelity, but it was usually more in terms of keeping-one's-oaths-to-pater-familias, not avoid-sleeping-around. Frankly, I do not know why people think the Romans were great people. They were terrible people, who were very good at building things, setting things on fire, and killing people they didn't like. Just like every other empire we have records of.
Weiner disgusts me. He's proven himself to be a terrible human being who has no sympathy or empathy for other people. I think that basically disqualifies him from being a decent leader. He definitely isn't the kind of man I want in charge of my country.
I've been noticing an interesting distinction in this thread, and I want to try and put my finger on it. Some people are saying that this doesn't make a difference to Weiner's ability to do his job. Other people disagree. I think the difference lies in the definition of what his job is. If his job is to win funds for his district, to make back-room deals, and keep on top of procedural and legal issues then I agree that this doesn't necessarily directly relate to his ability to do all that.
But if a Congressperson's job is to lead and represent America, than this kind of crazy incompetence does effect Weiner's ability to do his job. I don't want to be represented by a creep who sent unwanted porn to people and cheated on his wife (if you are sending porn to people you are not married to, you are cheating on your spouse). He demonstrated seriously bad judgement, both with the photos and with how he tried to handle it.
Seriously, do we want leaders who make the right-wing nutjobs (of whatever religion - I'm looking at you, Taliban) look like they might have a point? Because that's what Weiner is.