RALEIGH - Guilt by association has a long and checkered history. Nearly 2,000 years ago, Matthew's Gospel reports, the Pharisees asked Jesus' disciples "why does your teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners?" It's clear from the context that the Pharisees were not so much interested in an answer to that question as in raising doubts about Jesus' unsavory associates.

This year's primaries have seen a marked resurgence in the concept of guilt by association.

Barack Obama has been taking the heat in the past weeks for his association with his former pastor, Jeremiah Wright, and the various incendiary comments made by that clergyman. Pastor Wright, however, is only the most notorious example.

Gubernatorial candidate Richard Moore has been criticized for consorting with Wall Street investors in his role as state treasurer. Not to be outdone, opponents of Bev Perdue have sought to tar her with the fact that one can buy products emblazoned with the Confederate flag -- presumably alongside slushies and menthol cigarettes -- in the convenience stores owned by her husband. Even John McCain has been targeted for seeking the endorsement of another controversial pastor who sees the "Roman Church" as the "great whore" from the Book of Revelation.

While throwing mud from any of these associations is very tempting, we need to be careful about drawing conclusions. The winning presidential candidate is likely to attract the votes of well over 60 million Americans. (George W. Bush got over 62 million in 2004 and that reflected just 50.7 percent of the total votes cast.) Among that number will no doubt be many sinners, holders of unorthodox and even outrageous views, owners of Confederate regalia and even some tax collectors.

While associations from voters to the candidates are necessarily attenuated, what about closer associates? Among Hillary Clinton's closest associates is a lawyer who was disbarred after lying to a grand jury. (Oh, and he was also a two-term president of the United States).

At the most fundamental level, guilt by association is a logical fallacy: Hitler was a vegetarian; Hitler was one of the most evil men in history; therefore, vegetarianism is evil. Just like that faulty syllogism, guilt by association is necessarily simplistic and unnuanced. In other words, it's obviously wrong.

You don't have to attend church every Sunday to know that the views of the preacher can't properly be attributed to everyone in the congregation, even those who are awake during the sermon. Family associations are particularly dicey. President Kennedy's father had some pretty unsavory views concerning Germany in the 1930s. Would it be fair, though, to hold the son accountable for the father? Just as a matter of logic, how fair is it to hold a candidate accountable for Confederate flag refrigerator magnets sold by a business owned by her husband? Put another way, can we reasonably expect our governor to police those stores in search of potentially offensive items?

In addition to the logical problem of guilt by association, the concept is firmly rejected in American law. In a 1951 U.S. Supreme Court case concerning a government employee alleged to have been a member of a "disloyal organization," Justice William O. Douglas condemned what he called the "technique" of guilt by association, referring to it as "one of the most odious institutions of history." Guilt under our American system, according to Justice Douglas, is personal. Indeed, in Douglas' words, "when we make guilt vicarious we borrow from systems alien to ours and ape our enemies."

In the end, both logic and law counsel that we judge our candidates personally and not based solely on associations with others, whether it be other persons, groups, ideas or even products. Obama has held elective office since 1997 without ever uttering one word that might cause someone to think that he holds some of the more egregious views attributed to his former pastor. In 22 years of public life, Lt. Gov. Perdue has never given any indication that she pines for the antebellum South. The associations -- thin as they are -- don't lead to guilt.

In the words of that wise justice over 50 years ago, guilt is personal. Let's keep it that way.

(Press Millen is a trial lawyer in Raleigh.)

Get $150+ in coupons in every Sunday N&O. Click here for convenient home delivery.