Tylenol Puts Two Moms into classic 1943 Norman Rockwell Painting

[Huckleberry]

Not true.

Hypocrisy is, literally, a deliberate false front worn to deceive others. It's the careful presentation and acting out of a lie.

Morally normal people loathe hypocrisy; they hate deliberate, knowing falsehood. That is not the same as inconsistency with what one believes - ALL of us are guilty of that from time to time, but that does not make us fakes, only human and sinning. Hypocrisy is something very different; hypocrisy is planned for a purpose, tailored for an effect, and intentional in pursuing a goal that the hypocrite believes can only be obtained through deception. And that is why they're condemned.

You do realize you're trying to explain the meaning of the word "hypocrisy" to a liberal, don't you?

 

[Huckleberry]

They're a loving and connected family, and that's something to celebrate.

The question is whether or not you recognize homosexuality as perverse and destructive. If you do, then you see not a loving and connected family, but a very sick one. If you don't (or, much more likely, don't want to) you see (or at least pretend to) the loving and connected family you claim.

I see this picture much the same as you would if it included a heroin addict shooting up at the table or an uncle fondling one of the children, all while the family as a whole smiles and carries on as if nothing at all is wrong. It's painful to see.

 

[musterion]

You do realize you're trying to explain the meaning of the word "hypocrisy" to a liberal, don't you?

I know, I know.

 

[musterion]

I see this picture much the same as you would if it included a heroin addict shooting up at the table or an uncle fondling one of the children, all while the family as a whole smiles and carries on as if nothing at all is wrong.

Or these, as far as leftists are concerned. Memory-holed. Doublethink. Never happened. How many fingers am I holding up now, Winston?

 

[Town Heretic]

Not true.

I think Paul noted an inherent hypocrisy in the distinction between that which we desire to do and that which we do, or between the professed will and action.

Hypocrisy is, literally, a deliberate false front worn to deceive others. It's the careful presentation and acting out of a lie.

You're speaking to a state and not an act. I think AB is pointing out that we all at some time or another fail our principles, act against what we would state as a rule of conduct. So an act of hypocrisy or acts can be a failure that isn't necessarily tied to an intent to deceive anyone.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Not true.

Hypocrisy is, literally, a deliberate false front worn to deceive others. It's the careful presentation and acting out of a lie.

Morally normal people loathe hypocrisy; they hate deliberate, knowing falsehood. That is not the same as inconsistency with what one believes - ALL of us are guilty of that from time to time, but that does not make us fakes, only human and sinning. Hypocrisy is something very different; hypocrisy is planned for a purpose, tailored for an effect, and intentional in pursuing a goal that the hypocrite believes can only be obtained through deception. And that is why they're condemned.

Well thanks for going to the trouble to explain it in such depth but there really wasn't any need - hence why I used the term 'to a degree'. If you've never been guilty of a double standard at any point in your life then you're probably unique quite frankly.

 

[Arthur Brain]

I think Paul noted an inherent hypocrisy in the distinction between that which we desire to do and that which we do, or between the professed will and action.


You're speaking to a state and not an act. I think AB is pointing out that we all at some time or another fail our principles, act against what we would state as a rule of conduct. So an act of hypocrisy or acts can be a failure that isn't necessarily tied to an intent to deceive anyone.

Quite.

:thumb:

 

[Arthur Brain]

You do realize you're trying to explain the meaning of the word "hypocrisy" to a liberal, don't you?

Because of course all "conservatives" have never been guilty of it right? I don't even identify as a 'liberal' and don't reduce people to some silly little pigeonholed label regardless.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Or these, as far as leftists are concerned. Memory-holed. Doublethink. Never happened. How many fingers am I holding up now, Winston?

I don't know which 'leftist's' you're referring to with this but as far as I'm concerned any sort of child abuse from any parent is completely intolerable.

 

[The Barbarian]

Funny that for all Annsabanana's screechy preaching, her own church won't (yet) validate a relationship such as depicted in the ad but prefers to keep most of its queers in the closet.

Ironically, the Church welcomes homosexuals as sinners like the rest of us, who need God's grace. We distinguish between homosexual behavior which cannot be condoned, and homosexuals, who can choose chastity with God's help.

Given the number of non-Catholic clerics who have denounced homosexuals, only to be exposed as bisexual or homosexual, I'd say you were attacking from a very exposed position.

But then you've got lots of scars on that "position", haven't you, Musty?