Some time ago a past President of this nation was under fire for ethical impropriety while in the White House. Many cried for his job because he had not only used his position of power in an inappropriate way but he had also lied about it and covered it up with that power. Others cried his personal life was not an issue but his public life and the benefits he was procuring for the nation out weighed his personal weakness. It would seem the public life was far more important to the average American because that president although somewhat beleaguered was able to hold his position. At that time it occurred to me that a rather troubling question was not being asked. A local talk show host while lamenting the lack of discretion our leader displayed, insisted he should not be judged at a public level over his private life. One curious caller asked the host what he thought the most important human social relationship was. The host answered, “Well I suppose that would be the marriage relationship.” His caller then quipped, “How do you believe that a man, who can not be faithful in the most important human relationship, will be faithful elsewhere?” The host was stumped it would seem and then returned, “That would be a moral issue.” His caller then said’ “Good idea, lets discuss morality.” He was met with the same response this blogger has been getting on the same matter. As an older (not old) man I have been of late acutely aware of the dynamics of intra-gender communication. I have over 22 years of marriage found myself challenged by what I have perceived to be a rather sharp difference in the thought process of my female wife and my male self. I have therefore conducted a non, but quasi scientific study, by questioning virtually every husband and wife I met, if they had experienced the same phenomenon. My lack of scientific credentials not withstanding, I found nary a one who did not agree. Most concluded it was not so much personality as gender related. I then boldly went where I perhaps should not have gone and asked each participant whom they thought was better or more necessary. I got quite a few different opinions to that question but after the analytical query, ‘which was dispensable’, a painfully obvious conclusion was drawn that without both, quite frankly in one generation, humanity would likely cease. Cloning is not yet reliable enough. Now I am challenged to ask the question. Is there a component to human sexuality that connects to morality?