DNA 證據面前，終於承認自己是競選期間的婚外戀情人所生孩子的父親， 並已經和妻子伊麗莎白分居(據說伊麗莎白的確努力試圖原諒愛得華，甚至在聖誕節期間邀請這位自己孩子的half sister 來家共度節日，還給她 挑選禮物，但大概最後實在“忍無可忍”了，提出離婚)。目前他的競選助手 Andrew Young關於競選期間一些內幕的書“政客”("The Politician")即將出版，將披露更多背後的“黑幕”. 此書可能會和前不久出版的那本 一樣，成為揭露競選中不為人知的一些內幕的 bombshell (A couple of quotes: Edward once complained during a campaign trip: "I hate it when those fat redneck shovel food on my face. I dont even like to be there..."; and something in the line of "neither the black man or white woman has a chance. Im the only possible winner" -line -- talk about arrogance and politically incorrect language!).
關於這個事情本身，以前在相關的一篇文章中已經討論過
(見下面鏈接)，這裡不再多說。不過，還是想表達一下對這個newest development的憤怒。我憤怒，不僅僅因為這位一貫以“顧家好男人”形象自居的政治人物在一直對自己無私奉獻的妻子最艱難的時刻(身患癌症)在外偷歡，更因為事發之後他為了遮掩事實真相而進行的一系列令人不齒的行徑。除了一再否認自己和那位攝影師有染之外，他甚至要求自己的競選助手(就是這位出書的Andrew Young)“大包大攬”，挺身而出承認自己是那位私生子的父親，企圖以此瞞天過海；而這位助手，不管出於什麼考慮，居然還真答應了(真是大義凜然啊，不知愛德華許了他什麼好處；而現在看到紙包不住火了，乾脆來個反戈一擊， 可見這些政治交易都是不堪一擊的勾當)。當然如果此事僅僅限於此，還不至於引得高法介入，但有證據表明，愛德華陣營為了堵住這位情人的嘴，曾經動用競選資金，付給她一筆錢(more than $1 million, according to Andrew Young)，而這正是目前高等法院調查的主要內容。
Thanks for the follow up. I see your point. As in many situations, just saying "it's the law" does not end the discussion, but in this case, there's also the commonly held social norm, or the morality that most people accept. If there's need to change the norm, then there has to be strong enough force behind the alternative lifestyle. This is beyond the scope of this article and I'm not an expert in sociology, so I can't really comment further.
I do understand anyone can make the mistake that Edwards made in his marriage, but that's not what this article is focused on. I'm more appauled by his cover-up and his hypocritic behaviors, than the infedility itself. You are right, everyone has his or her weaknesses, and he might have needs that cannot be fulfilled by his marriage. But it does not give him permission to look outside of his marriage for answers, as long as he's still married. At least that's my understanding of the vows one makes in marriage. Of course, some people say that the stresses of his campaign and his wife's diseases were exactly the reasons behind his missteps, but I just don't buy it. This is the same "double standard" applied to men and women - if a man betrays his wife when he's pregnant, because his "sexual and emotional needs" are not satisfied when his wife is devoting all her energy and attention to the unborn child, why are women called "sluts" if they engage in the simular behavior in their weak moments? I'm no feminist, I just think we are giving men too much slacks and excuses in this society, which is unforutnate regression.
About this, I have a lot of discussion in the previous article about this, in case you didn't read it, here's the link again:
I was not seeking answer to my question. But I guess it might be worthwhile to put forward this question, or simply ask ourselves . We are alwasy taught not to do something, due to the law or other ethical reasons. Do we understand why or do we always ask why ? We hold some ideas only becasue we are taught in that way ?
We are criticizing Edwards for his betryal. Can we do better if we were in his circumstance ? He may just need some care from somebody else when he was stressed caused by his family issue and also his campaign. Remember we are all weak in some aspects of our life. I would not criticize him as if I could do a better job than him.
Just one question. Why one man can only marry one woman , and one woman can only marry one man ? Intuively, I do not see anything terribly wrong with it.
