Those of you who are not in the New York area aren't being treated to day-to-day, excruciating coverage of the Rudy Giuliani/Donna Hanover divorce.<P>For those of you who don't know the story: Rudy Giuliani, Republican mayor of New York, has been openly dating his "very good friend", a woman named Judy Nathan. This is a guy who told his wife that he was divorcing her via a televised press conference to the media. At any rate, the situation has become ugly, with Donna Hanover, the mayor's wife trying to keep the girlfriend out of Gracie Mansion, which is the official Governor's mansion, and the mayor's lawyers saying he can have whoever in there he wants, because it's a public building.<P>Imagine your husband bringing his paramour to your home WHILE YOU'RE THERE, and you can imagine what's going on.<P>According to a report I heard on NewsRadio88 this morning, Giuliani is now claiming that he could not have carried on a "full sexual relationship" with Judy Nathan, because his surgery for prostate cancer has rendered him impotent.<P>A related story on this appears at the [url=]New York Daily News[/url]<P>What the Mayor is saying, in essence, is that because he can't do the old in-out, in-out (if indeed, that's the case), he has not committed adultery.<P>Sound familiar?<P>You'd be surprised at how many people believe that if there ain't no intercourse, there ain't no sex. It doesn't matter what other practices there are. I'm sure those of you whose spouses have "just kissed" others, or those of us who have seen our spouses exchanging significant looks with another, would disagree.<P>My point in posting this story is simply this: I've seen many, many postings on here from people who, wanting to blame SOMEONE for their spouse's affair, or what seems to be an epidemic of infidelity (and keep in mind that what we see here is a skewed sample). They have decided that no one ever cheated on his/her spouse prior to Bill Clinton, and that no one else has ever split hairs about what constitutes sex. They believe "liberals" are somehow more prone to extramarital affairs (Bob Barr, Newt Gingrich, Bob Livingston, Jimmy Swaggart, and according to some reports, George H.W. Bush (the old one) give lie to that notion).<P>Some one posted a thread here about whether infidelity hurts Christians more. Initially I found that title offensive, until I read the post.<P>The fact of the matter is that no particular political affiliation has a greater propensity than any other to commit adultery. No religious affiliation has a greater propensity than any other to commit adultery. And no political or religious affiliation INSULATES us from temptation, or from stepping over the line.<P>I think it's useful to treat each of our cases individually, and not try to explain the inexplicable by pointing fingers at politicians and famous people, who live lives different from ours anyway.
