It amazes me how persistent you are on being wrong. I'm not even going to bother to read the rest of your post, because I know I can ask one simple question you're incapable of answering in any way but one, the one way which proves my point.
Was this "scandal" about his personal life or was it job related? Until you can tell me it was job related, I don't need to read anything else from you.
I had a girlfriend once who would have been perfectly okay with it. In fact, she would have enjoyed the three of us getting together in person. I'm not really that kind of person, but she wouldn't have had a problem at all with it.
So how does that relate to your question?
No, he acted foolishly, but his actions were reflective of decisions made in his personal life, not his professional. I would not be voting for him to be Minister of Morality, I would be electing him to run my city.
There are many things I would not want my hypothetical children to do...one such thing would be to judge a man totally by his actions in one narrow aspect. I prefer my children be able to see beyond such a limited understanding of the world and realize people are multi-faceted and complex beings, and inefficiencies in one area do not automatically indicate inefficiencies in others.
To directly answer your question, no I would not, but at the same time, his penis has nothing to do with how well he might do his job.