Does a good leading story make a good leader?
Getting into politics in today’s society can almost be compared to walking into a lions den. There is so much heresy and mud slinging between candidates, so much it becomes difficult to decide which one would be the best choice for any position. The real question is, when does personal life starts to interfere with the political sphere? The private life and morality of a public figure should not affect the public’s view of their ability to serve because their political prowess should not be discounted by what follies they have taken in their lives.
Throughout life, idols and guardians base morality off of the idea that everyone makes mistakes, but it does not necessarily make that person inherently bad. This leaves room for redemption. With that said, how does one situation apply to all situations? Assuming that a person who makes one mistake should be crucified, is hypocritical because it does not support the idea that people can learn to correct future endeavors. Political figures are no different.
People as a whole pride themselves on being “good”. When private lives of potential leaders are being portrayed, it is hard to decipher not only what is true, but what part even pertains to being beneficial to people as a whole. The private life and morals of public political figures should stay just that, private. People seem to forget that they are not part the private life, which hinders the decision of who would be better for the whole, rather than one single person. Because there is not one set of rules, it is hard to have a base standard to start at when judging someone, let alone someone who makes important decisions for many people. Thinking that what is good for one is good for all eliminates the general aspect that a leader must take into consideration.
The morality of a person can be taken in good or bad light. Lying, cheating and stealing are obviously the traits we use to judge a...