@Suicrat said:
Also, the marriage vow you verbally agree to and the marriage contract (which literally is signed, and is literally a legal document) you sign stipulates whether or not you can have sex with other people. Most marriage contracts demand that both partner remain faithful to the other. Sanford may or may not have in this case had such a stipulation in his marriage agreement, but considering his Christian background, it is safe to assume he did. In this case he breeched his contract, which isn't a criminal act, but is nonetheless an issue to be settled by the legal system. Why would you trust a person who broke a legal contract with a person he promised to spend his life and produce children with to fix a broken sewer main, or even simply adhere to his oath of office?
"
I am by no means a marriage expert nor a lawyer. I have only gotten married once (and hopefully only once) in the state of Michigan. But there was nothing at all in the legal documents of my marriage about any claim to fidelity. Other states marriage licenses may be different, I do not know, but nothing here at least.
But as for the wedding vows, I have no idea what their legal standing is. I do not know what Sanford vowed to do or not do in his wedding vows, but you are probably right in the assumption of some vow of fidelity. It would be interesting to hear the opinion of someone who has studied law to show what extent does legality of wedding vows reach. Is a vow in a wedding ceremony a legally binding contract? Or is it just "ceremony" and has no legal standing? I have no idea.
Now, even if he has broken a legal contract, he should not resign. In fact, I do not think politicians should ever resign. They were elected by the people to do a job, and they should continue to do that job until the electorate decides to remove them, either through a recall or by simply not re-electing them. I am a firm believer in due process, and the established methods and policies should be carried out as laid out in the law.