Contradictions and hypocrisy in your world?

Question

What are some really good topics for conversations that could go on for days?

Answer 1

Christians who preach about the sin of fornification and Christians are guilty of committing this "sin" more than non-religious people.

Answer 2

It seems reasonable to state -upfront- that there's ample evidence throughout human history that contradictions and hypocrisy go with the territory ... meaning, in my view, it's more of a natural undertaking (a norm) than it is an exceptation (an aberration).

With that said -as an assumption- for my following remarks, please don't take that as a statement of pride from me ... it's simply an observation.

If we believe the basic premises of our humanity ... thinking, language, problem-solving, creativity, capacity for infinite learning, etc.- then along with those unique attributes comes the possibility of everyone being able to add new and different information today to the accumulated storage of information from days past.  That alone sets all 6.6 billion of us up for contradictions (mainly) and hypocrisy (at times).

In an attempt to neutralize the negative considerations that seem to be associated with the terms "contradiction" and "hypocrisy" I feel it's important to say that beyond the human naturalness of these phenomena, there also is a malicious, calculated side that, in my view, is the distinctive difference between a contradiction and a hypocrisy.

For example, at the age of 20 most people will say things, make pledges, form alliances, and engender acts and aspirations that by age 30 are seemingly in complete contradiction to ten years previous ... that's human nature and, in my view, neither upsetting nor worthy of over-analysis. At the least, personal contradictions can be viewed as growth and development ... provided the contradictions are not enabling a dysfunction.

On the other hand, hypocrisy seems to be less about "the self" and more about the self's projection of morals, beliefs, values -and, depending on power and position- rules and laws as applied to others.  This, in my view, is a serious leap from contradictions and, as such, is much more pernicious and fraught with dangerous circumstances.

A couple of recent example comes to mind as shown by our (United States) government:

(1)  In March of 2005, President Bush flew back to Washington, D.C. early from his vacation to add his personal power (as the president) to influence the US Congress which had decided to intervene in the Terri Schiavo case (Florida woman on life support for 15 years).  That act was unprecedented in our then nearly 230 year history.  At the same time, neither Bush, his administration, or the Congress was very much interested in saving the lives of American troops in Iraq and Afghanstan.

(2) In October 2005, the Bush white House and Attorney General John Ashcroft asked the US Supreme Court to intervene and block the state of Oregon's assisted suicide law (Oregon being the only state in our nation with such a law).  

Oregon's law (voted in by the citizens of the state of Oregon) was viewed as an ideological threat to the present administration, so they used their power and influence to attempt to not only discredit the state law but also eradicate it.

In the same year (2005), according to the Department of Justice there were 3,254 inmates on death row in American prisons -and, by years end, sixteen states had executed 60 prisoners; President Bush's home state of Texas executed more than any other state by sending 19 inmates to their death.

To me, there are two clear-cut examples of hypocrisy and that is, by far, a lot worse than contradictions.