Julia Gillard demonstrated reckless unethical conduct, lack of self control, lack of discipline and very poor judgement in her affair a married man. It is reasonable to assume that she came clean because the alternative, a cover-up, would have resulted in a worse outcome when discovered.

Marital infidelity, having an affair with a married person and lying are just as despicable and wrong for you and me as they are for Julia Gillard. However, as the most senior person in government she is in a unique position of trust (and power) and her deceit affects everyone.

The early opinion polls showed that fair-minded Australians were prepared to give her a go and take her promises at face value. However it is reasonable and right that the same good citizens should shy away from her if she cannot show she is trustworthy and decent enough to represent them in the highest public office. Gender isn't relevant but her ethics and principles, or lack of them would be a high priority for most Australians.

Well Bob Hawke was one of the best Prime Ministers we have ever had, and he's a vain self-glorious philanderer whose biographer is now his wife but was one of his philanderees! I'm sure that sexual indiscretions do not disqualify from being a good leader. They are just one of many things to hold in the balance.

Runner might like to answer the question of why David was fit to be the greatest king of Israel according to the Bible when not only did he seduce another man's wife but he ensured that the man was killed in battle so as to cover-up the fact that his wife was pregnant to the King.

I'm not particularly wanting to run a Christian argument here, but as Runner only seems to operate on those terms, I think it can be demonstrated without distorting the theology, that sexual indiscretion is not held by the Christian church to disqualify anyone from anything in an earthly sense, and that it may actually lead to a great good. The outcome of the liaison between David and Bathsheba was, if you follow the biblical genealogy, Jesus.

You don't have to pick some texts that are on the edge, but you can go right to the centre.

The New Testament is even more forgiving on the issue.

Mind you, I hope if we are going to discuss Christianity those who would criticise Runner for being obnoxious (which I think he is being with some of his posts) might want to refrain from being obnoxious themselves.

We all wish our PM would be trustworthy and committed to the job despite their personal failings. Hawke was a flawed human being to his own admission but he still cared about policy, about social justice even if you didn't always agree.

As a woman I don't approve of Ms Gillard's affair as I sympathise with the wife. At least Gillard has come clean about it which suggests she feels some remorse. Young people sometimes do silly things and society tends to judge the 'mistress' more harshly than the married man. Almost as if he was mesmerised and tricked into an affair by a seductive siren, as though he has had no part in the betrayal of his wife despite being committed in marriage.

I am not sure how this will play over into policy making and as for trust why is it any different if a woman had an affair than if a male leader had an affair or was seen in a strip club. It may sound harsh but I do think gender is significant here, many still holding onto that 'one of the boys' mentality and Gillard is the wrong gender to get away with that one. She is not a Clinton.

It is no surprise that there has always been affairs going on in Parliament House - many that never come to light for various reasons. It might have something to do with the adrenalin and allure of power (I am no psychologist) but that does not excuse hurting another human being and in fact with that power should come responsibility.

We all have to be led by our conscience and this has nothing to do with religion/non-religion but with how committed we are to our personal beliefs and values.

GrahamY

'Runner might like to answer the question of why David was fit to be the greatest king of Israel according to the Bible when not only did he seduce another man's wife but he ensured that the man was killed in battle so as to cover-up the fact that his wife was pregnant to the King.'

If you were to read on Graham you will see that David was dethroned from his kingship by his own son as a result of his behaviour. David came to his senses and repented knowing that he was not worthy to receive his kingship back. One of the things that made him great was his willing to repent when he knew he had done wrong.

The issue for me is not about whether someone has an affair or not. We are all hopelessly lost in sin without Christ. The issue is whether as a nation whether we want someone to lead us whose private philosophy ( extreme feminism, lack of biblical morality, okay to say you are not going to stab your leader in the back) inevitably works out into public policy and whether we want our children to have a role model like this.

I have no doubt whether it is Mr Abbott or Ms Gillard that they to can be forgiven and go on to be successful leaders. To refuse to look at yourself and see how your own philosophy and dogmas has led you into this sort of behaviour shows you have not learn't from your sin (or mistakes). The obvious answer is that someone who does not believe that one day they will be accountable make up the rules as they go. I along with many other Australians believe we have the right to have an expectation that our leader acknowledges common decency.

cont

You mention Bob Hawke. He could of been a brilliant pm. Paul Keating would disagree. Some say he was brilliant because he used the abilities of others while he himself was the pr man. The point for me however is that you could hardly say to your children that a man who does the dirty on his wife and kids is a good role model. Preferably I would prefer a leader with a little less charisma and talent but demonstrates it is important for dads to be faithful to mums.

Ultimately it is like sports stars. Some think they are role models some think that they are entertainers. No one could argue that Tiger is the greatest golf player of all time.

In a democratic society people will vote for any number of reasons. Usually the adamic nature will vote for the party that is going to put an extra $10 in their pay packet. Some like Belly will vote along party lines.

At the end of the day I think if moral character is an important issue. Those not say its not are the first to question Howard for sending troops to Iraq. It might be unrealistic but I would like a pm with common decency. They are a lot less likely to sell us down the drain to the corrupt immoral UN.

Just checked the story Runner. The child of David and Bathsheba conceived while she was married to Uriah the Hittite actually dies, but a subsequent child of David and Bathsheba is Solomon, who succeeds him much later and with his help against the plots of another son who seeks to overthrow David. David does repent, but how do you happen to know the mind of Julia? She may well be deeply sorry for the affair, but I bet she didn't arrange for the wife to meet with an industrial accident!

So you're substantially wrong. I made a mistake about the lineage of Jesus, but the rest is substantially correct.

Moral character is an important issue, but there is more to that than sexual conduct. For me the great problem with David is not that he slept with Bathsheba but that he had her husband killed. David murdered for his sexual pecaddillo, I bet Julia didn't.

And others might argue with you about your championing of John Howard as a moral person. On one view he sent troops to war to support our relationship with the USA. That could be a bigger moral issue than Julia and Craig.