Holier than thou right-wing theocrats are having a hypocritical field day condemning Weiner for such activity. That is, they are condemning him just on the basis of a few photographs less provocative than many Hollywood celebrities have taken of themselves on an almost daily basis.
Remember that, on many occasions, holier-than-thou right-wingers have been caught doing far more than sending photographs. For example the self-proclaimed "bishop" Eddie Long has been accused of homosexual activity with four men who were members of his church. Nobody is actually claiming that Weiner really had sex with any of these women. A number of these photographs, while inappropriate, are not invitations to perform any kind of sexual act. Some are just jokes. Yet in the minds of many evangelicals, they can't see the distinction. Even feeling momentary lust is tantamount to adultery, for them. To wit, see my previous post called "The Imaginary Teaching of Jesus".
See, according to Jesus, even looking at a woman lustfully is tantamount to adultery. Arguably, sending a provocative picture of yourself to a woman is not even looking at the woman, though presumably he did look at her picture online, or he probably wouldn't have sent the provocative photo. Still, is there really anyone who observes the standard of not even looking at an attractive woman (or man)? Is it even possible, without living in a monastery, or being blind altogether, to avoid this kind of momentary, hormone-induced reaction?
Now, if it turns out that Weiner actually slept with other women while he was married, or attempted to sleep with them, then that is a different story. But just sending mainly clothed pictures isn't much of a scandal.