Barbara Walters "revelation" and Moral Reasoning

Recently Barbara Walters revealed (on Oprah) that she had an affair with a married man some thirty years ago. Maybe it was just the slant of the news report, but I was disappointed in the way one of her friends advised her at the time:

The news report read something like ,"You've got to end this. It will ruin your career."

Now that all those years have passed, I guess it won't ruin her career if she admits the affair. But is that the best reasoning we can think of? Is the preservation of one's career the right reason to end an adulterous affair? Or is an adulterous affair simply wrong period?

I assume the person who told Barbara Walters this was thinking that news of an affair between a white woman and a African American man who was elected to the Senate would be stigmatized by society at that time, so for the sake of her career she should end the affair.

But isn't the fact that she was having an adulterous relationship be enough of a moral reason to stop, no matter who the affair was with- whether he was White, Asian, Hispanic, or African American?

See, when we start making moral judgments based on the potential harmful consequences to ourselves, then we have already lost our moral footing. In effect, Barbara Walter's friend was advising her: "Stop, because if you don't you may get caught. And if you get caught your career may be over."

It is almost as if the advice came with a tacit approval of her sin- having an adulterous affair- and the only reason to stop was if she felt it could bring harmful consequences to her down the line.

The best moral basis for our decisions is what God has revealed in Scripture- otherwise known as divine command ethics. Judging actions merely by their consequences to ourselves or others is incomplete.