The revelations are so bad even Trump himself has apologised. Also he has quickly resorted to a playground tactic of saying Bill Clinton was worse. His defensiveness belies his guilt.
Whether Clinton was worse or not has nothing to do with Trump's disgraceful behaviour and the need to judge it clearly as making him unfit for an office he is unfit to hold on many other grounds as well. (Again, Hilary Clinton has grounds for not being considered fit for president, but those grounds don't make Trump a better candidate).
But here's the thing from a Christian point of view, neatly raised on PJ Media by D.C. McAllister (my bold):
"From the moment the tapes were made public, the drumbeat to Trump's personal walk of shame began. Politicians who formerly endorsed him fled in terror, not wanting the soiled stain of sexual stigma attached to them. NeverTrumpers descended in holier-than-thou glee as they declared how noble and right they've always been not to support such a despicable man. And the left has been howling like puritanical wolves, condemning him for his immorality and sexist treatment of women.
I find this reaction to Trump's private conversation rather ironic. It's ironic coming from a secular culture that long ago declared objective morality dead. It's ironic coming from politicos and media bottom-feeders who defended the abusive and disgusting behavior of Bill Clinton, not when he was a private citizen but when he was a sitting president."
In other words, picking up my headline to this post, the easy thing here to do is to howl in outrage, to bask in reflected glory of never having endorsed Trump but the hard thing to do - by today's subjectivity re sexuality - is to define the grounds on which Trump is actually morally wrong (and not simply offensive to 21st century notions of decency).
McAllister continues, with a well made point about the way Christians are treated today when they attempt to advance objective morality:
"The creep of moral relativism in America has been steady for many decades, increasing in speed to the point that the "slouching toward Gomorrah" has become a sprint. The notion that there is objective truth or absolute morality has been universally panned to the point that everything is tolerated except standards of right and wrong. "Everyone decides for himself what is right, especially when it comes to sex" is the mantra of today's culture.
For years, Christians in particular have been attacked and silenced as they've tried to challenge the immorality that is pervasive in today's society. When they tell people casual sex is wrong, they get the inevitable, "You have no right to tell me what I can or can't do." If they oppose sexual immorality in any form, including adultery, they’re maligned as sanctimonious puritans by lovers of libertinism."
"How ironic, then, that a culture which rejects moral standards has suddenly become so pure and pristine, sitting in judgment of someone they deem too immoral to become president because of something he said in private. As a logical person, I have to ask these paragons of newly found virtue where this standard by which they've judged Trump is found.If morality is relative to each individual—a purely subjective experience—by what standard are they judging Trump? Obviously, in such a secular climate, there can’t even be a “standard.”Why should anyone listen to people who out of one side of their mouths declare the death of objective moral standards yet out of the other condemn someone for violating objective moral standards?Those who are complaining about Trump today have no basis for their moral outrage. That's because their secular amoral worldview rejects any basis for that moral judgment. Any argument they make against the "immorality" of Trump is stolen, or at least borrowed for expediency, from a religious worldview they have soundly rejected."