Another Hypocrite Bites Dust!
- Thread starter SirJosephPorter
- Start date
"In public life, hypocrisy is a bigger crime than adultery."- Where did you find that little gem carved in stone. Hypocrisy is actually more of a "trap" than a sin. We are pretty much 100% hypocrites to some degree, I quite often find myself cussing out someone for one thing or another, and then lo and behold a day or later I find myself daydreaming and doing exactly the same thing. I think all of us have "good" advise for people at one time or another, but don't follow it 100%.
Quote:
In public life, hypocrisy is a bigger crime than adultery.
The Democrats should know!
Sure they know, EagleSmack. They see conservative hypocrisy all the time, Sanford being only the latest example. Offhand I could rattle of at least half a dozen examples off the top of my head (starting with the drug addict on loan from God, Rush Limbaugh).
In public life, hypocrisy is a bigger crime than adultery.
The Democrats should know!
Sure they know, EagleSmack. They see conservative hypocrisy all the time, Sanford being only the latest example. Offhand I could rattle of at least half a dozen examples off the top of my head (starting with the drug addict on loan from God, Rush Limbaugh).
I think, the reality is that monogamy creates hypocrisy. Like lions, a man's instinct is to spread his seed far and wide. A woman's instinct is to keep him around until her brood is independent, even if it means tricking or cajoling him.
Cliffy, there are evolutionary reasons for both men and women not to be monogamous. A man wants to spread his seed far and wide, into as many women as possible, so that his offspring’s will survive.
A woman on the other hand, wants to mate with as many men as possible, so that she would conceive and conceive with the best possible seed. This behavior is observed in nature in many species (e.g. in the species where the normal structure is dominant male and a herd of females, the females are observed having sex with other males on the sly). However, a woman’s adultery is usually well hidden. Because as you said, a woman wants a stable home for her offsprings.
While a man may leave his wife for his mistress, a woman is much less likely to do that, especially if he has children. However, there is no reason to suppose that adultery is any less common among women than among men.
Cliffy, there are evolutionary reasons for both men and women not to be monogamous. A man wants to spread his seed far and wide, into as many women as possible, so that his offspring’s will survive.
A woman on the other hand, wants to mate with as many men as possible, so that she would conceive and conceive with the best possible seed. This behavior is observed in nature in many species (e.g. in the species where the normal structure is dominant male and a herd of females, the females are observed having sex with other males on the sly). However, a woman’s adultery is usually well hidden. Because as you said, a woman wants a stable home for her offsprings.
While a man may leave his wife for his mistress, a woman is much less likely to do that, especially if he has children. However, there is no reason to suppose that adultery is any less common among women than among men.
I'm well aware of that. If we weren't so immature, it wouldn't affect our relationships. If we were taught from birth that multiple sexual partners has little to do with whether or not you love your partner, we wouldn't have all this hypocrisy.
People have tried that approach within a marriage, and I'm quite sure that somewhere along the way it blows up in their faces.
It seems to work in europe, where the men have been taught 'that', and the
women are taught to turn the other way, and accept it, doesn't make it right,
and is obviously a man's world in those countries, and women come second, and
that includes the mistress.
Women usually can't think that way, once they make up their minds to settle,
as a rule, they want faithfullness, it is a very complex subject, and so many
things happen within a marriage to upset that faithfullness, then trust is gone,
and the end is near.
It has to be a 'true blue' contract, with no veering off track, and that takes a
truly strong character within partners, for their lifetime.
Look at this guy who has just 'bombarded' his marriage. He has four sons, and
they have forever, been affected by his behavior, they will always remember
what he did, and perhaps they will follow in his footsteps, or be disgusted by
his actions, and won't ever do what he did.
Some people are 'truly' loyal , and that is who they are, and it doesn't
matter who trys to pull them off track, it won't work, I have so much respect
for that type of person, man or woman.
History shows that what goes around, comes around.
I am not surprised that the undisputed champion on schadenfreude, SirJosephPorter did not miss his opportunity to cast dispersions against Republicans, once more.
But remember, SirJosephPorter, that hypocrisy is NOT the exclusive purview of Republicans/conservatives.
What could be more hypocritical than bellying up to the altar to receive communion while being a committed promoter of infanticide/abortion, while Roman Catholic, as exhibited by people no lesser stature than Senators John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Speaker of The House, Nancy Pelosi? And many more so called "Catholics".
What could be more hypocritical than preaching about racial equality while being a Grand Wizard of the Klu Klux Klan, like Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia?
What could be more hypocritical than Al Gore preaching about Global Warming than he himself flying everywhere in his own Jet, leaving a far greater carbon foot print than you and I could ever leave in a hundred years?
What could be more hypocritical than a Democratic Presidential contender theowing his own wife - suffering from cancer - under the bus, like John Edwards?
What could be more hypocritical than the President of the United States getting a blow job under the desk in the Oval Office?
What could be more hypocritical than Barney Franks and Chris Dodd, who insisted on any deadbeat with no hope of EVER repaying a loan should live in a house they never had a chance to own, to live in a house they never earned to live in?
What could be more hypocritical than boasting about winning an election, when it is plain to see that without ACORN Obama would NOT BE President?
Seems like sexual/matrimonial infidelty is only condemning Republicans.
And that is the greatest hypcrisy of them all.
I am not surprised that the undisputed champion on schadenfreude, SirJosephPorter did not miss his opportunity to cast dispersions against Republicans, once more.
But remember, SirJosephPorter, that hypocrisy is NOT the exclusive purview of Republicans/conservatives.
What could be more hypocritical than bellying up to the altar to receive communion while being a committed promoter of infanticide/abortion, while Roman Catholic, as exhibited by people no lesser stature than Senators John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Speaker of The House, Nancy Pelosi? And many more so called "Catholics".
What could be more hypocritical than preaching about racial equality while being a Grand Wizard of the Klu Klux Klan, like Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia?
What could be more hypocritical than Al Gore preaching about Global Warming than he himself flying everywhere in his own Jet, leaving a far greater carbon foot print than you and I could ever leave in a hundred years?
What could be more hypocritical than a Democratic Presidential contender theowing his own wife - suffering from cancer - under the bus, like John Edwards?
What could be more hypocritical than the President of the United States getting a blow job under the desk in the Oval Office?
What could be more hypocritical than Barney Franks and Chris Dodd, who insisted on any deadbeat with no hope of EVER repaying a loan should live in a house they never had a chance to own, to live in a house they never earned to live in?
What could be more hypocritical than boasting about winning an election, when it is plain to see that without ACORN Obama would NOT BE President?
Seems like sexual/matrimonial infidelty is only condemning Republicans.
And that is the greatest hypcrisy of them all.
"Where the hell is old Yukon Jack when we need him?"
JLM, thanks for noticing my abscence. I have been waiting for SirJosephPorter's totally predictable post.
Seems like I was NOT wrong.
Keep this date live on your calendar. Any time in the future when there will be another homo Democrat running a prostitution ring from his taxpayer-funded apartment, or whenever a Democrat cheats on his wife, or whenever a Democrat engages in using the services of hookers, look for the immediate post by SirJosephPorter!
GOOD LUCK!!
And he's got the nerve to accuse ANYONE of hypocrisy!!
JLM, thanks for noticing my abscence. I have been waiting for SirJosephPorter's totally predictable post.
Seems like I was NOT wrong.
Keep this date live on your calendar. Any time in the future when there will be another homo Democrat running a prostitution ring from his taxpayer-funded apartment, or whenever a Democrat cheats on his wife, or whenever a Democrat engages in using the services of hookers, look for the immediate post by SirJosephPorter!
GOOD LUCK!!
And he's got the nerve to accuse ANYONE of hypocrisy!!
Talloola, I think most of us desire monogamy, that is the social conditioning (I have been married to the same woman for 33 years now). However, the natural tendency of humans is not to be monogamous, and that is what Cliffy was referring to.
Because it is the natural tendency, that doesn’t mean that we have to give in to it. In a civilized society there are many things we do that are against our natural tendency E.g. we don’t defecate when we want to, where we want to (that would be the natural tendency).
Cliffy, I don’t think Christians will agree with you on this one. Christian belief is that human beings are fallen creatures, sinful by nature.
Their problems are their own and nobody’s business. These scandals keep cropping up in USA, because USA is a puritanical society, obsessed about sex. In most other countries (perhaps even in Canada), it won’t be an issue.
However, I think USA is the only country where a large number of politicians from one particular party are always preaching to the masses how they should live their lives (on issues such as abortion, gay rights adultery, contraception etc.). Then when they get caught in their own hypocrisy, it is a big issue.
There is a simple solution for that, JLM. Don’t preach to others how they should live their lives, don’t try to dictate to others (like Republicans do). But many people like to insert their big noses into other people’s business, I suppose that is an ego trip. If one can tell others how they should live their life, I suppose that makes one feel superior. That probably is the reason why religious right and the Republicans are constantly preaching to the others.
But he who preaches to others, usually perishes by his own hypocrisy.
Yes, I agree with you, but the catagory I mentioned above is alive and well
in the world, just wanted to mention that fact, as most seem to believe that
such people don't exist, well they do, and in greater numbers that one would
think.
I am not surprised that the undisputed champion on schadenfreude, SirJosephPorter did not miss his opportunity to cast dispersions against Republicans, once more.
Yukon, the word you want is ‘aspersions’, not ‘dispersions’.
What could be more hypocritical than bellying up to the altar to receive communion while being a committed promoter of infanticide/abortion, while Roman Catholic, as exhibited by people no lesser stature than Senators John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Speaker of The House, Nancy Pelosi? And many more so called "Catholics".
Ands where is the hypocrisy in that? According to their religion, there is no inconsistency with holding pro life views and receiving communion. And apparently their Catholic priests agree. Evidently, so does the Pope, otherwise he would have forbidden Catholic priests to give communion to pro choice Catholics.
What could be more hypocritical than preaching about racial equality while being a Grand Wizard of the Klu Klux Klan, like Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia?
He was the Grand Wizard what, several decades ago? He changed his views, where is the hypocrisy?
What could be more hypocritical than Al Gore preaching about Global Warming than he himself flying everywhere in his own Jet, leaving a far greater carbon foot print than you and I could ever leave in a hundred years?
We have been though this before, Yukon. How does his carbon footprint compare with those with comparable wealth? Conservatives don’t answer this question, so I can only assume that his carbon footprint is a lot less that other multimillionaires. Otherwise conservatives would have made a big stink about it. I don’t see any hypocrisy.
What could be more hypocritical than a Democratic Presidential contender theowing his own wife - suffering from cancer - under the bus, like John Edwards?
That is adultery Yukon, not hypocrisy.
What could be more hypocritical than the President of the United States getting a blow job under the desk in the Oval Office?
That is sexual indiscretion, not hypocrisy. As I said before, you (like many conservatives) don’t’ understand the concept of hypocrisy. If somebody commits adultery (like Edwards), that doesn’t make him guilty of hypocrisy. If somebody who preaches to others not to commit adultery and then he himself commits adultery (Sanford), he is guilty of hypocrisy.
What could be more hypocritical than Barney Franks and Chris Dodd, who insisted on any deadbeat with no hope of EVER repaying a loan should live in a house they never had a chance to own, to live in a house they never earned to live in?
Where did you read that, Townhall? Even if true (and I don’t know that it is, anybody can make unsubstantiated accusations), that is poor, bad policy, not hypocrisy.
What could be more hypocritical than boasting about winning an election, when it is plain to see that without ACORN Obama would NOT BE President?
And just what is hypocritical about that (assuming it is true which I seriously doubt)?
As I said, I don’t think you understand the concept of hypocrisy. Whenever a Republican politician is exposed as a hypocrite, you simply rattle off all the wrong doings by Democrats (real or imagined) and call it hypocrisy.
Yukon, the word you want is ‘aspersions’, not ‘dispersions’.
What could be more hypocritical than bellying up to the altar to receive communion while being a committed promoter of infanticide/abortion, while Roman Catholic, as exhibited by people no lesser stature than Senators John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Speaker of The House, Nancy Pelosi? And many more so called "Catholics".
Ands where is the hypocrisy in that? According to their religion, there is no inconsistency with holding pro life views and receiving communion. And apparently their Catholic priests agree. Evidently, so does the Pope, otherwise he would have forbidden Catholic priests to give communion to pro choice Catholics.
What could be more hypocritical than preaching about racial equality while being a Grand Wizard of the Klu Klux Klan, like Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia?
He was the Grand Wizard what, several decades ago? He changed his views, where is the hypocrisy?
What could be more hypocritical than Al Gore preaching about Global Warming than he himself flying everywhere in his own Jet, leaving a far greater carbon foot print than you and I could ever leave in a hundred years?
We have been though this before, Yukon. How does his carbon footprint compare with those with comparable wealth? Conservatives don’t answer this question, so I can only assume that his carbon footprint is a lot less that other multimillionaires. Otherwise conservatives would have made a big stink about it. I don’t see any hypocrisy.
What could be more hypocritical than a Democratic Presidential contender theowing his own wife - suffering from cancer - under the bus, like John Edwards?
That is adultery Yukon, not hypocrisy.
What could be more hypocritical than the President of the United States getting a blow job under the desk in the Oval Office?
That is sexual indiscretion, not hypocrisy. As I said before, you (like many conservatives) don’t’ understand the concept of hypocrisy. If somebody commits adultery (like Edwards), that doesn’t make him guilty of hypocrisy. If somebody who preaches to others not to commit adultery and then he himself commits adultery (Sanford), he is guilty of hypocrisy.
What could be more hypocritical than Barney Franks and Chris Dodd, who insisted on any deadbeat with no hope of EVER repaying a loan should live in a house they never had a chance to own, to live in a house they never earned to live in?
Where did you read that, Townhall? Even if true (and I don’t know that it is, anybody can make unsubstantiated accusations), that is poor, bad policy, not hypocrisy.
What could be more hypocritical than boasting about winning an election, when it is plain to see that without ACORN Obama would NOT BE President?
And just what is hypocritical about that (assuming it is true which I seriously doubt)?
As I said, I don’t think you understand the concept of hypocrisy. Whenever a Republican politician is exposed as a hypocrite, you simply rattle off all the wrong doings by Democrats (real or imagined) and call it hypocrisy.
"Where the hell is old Yukon Jack when we need him?"
JLM, thanks for noticing my abscence. I have been waiting for SirJosephPorter's totally predictable post.
Seems like I was NOT wrong.
Yukon, I also told JLM that you were probably waiting to get your talking points from far right websites. So has Townhall commented on it, have they defended Sanford? Did they give you the talking points? I will have to look it up.
JLM, thanks for noticing my abscence. I have been waiting for SirJosephPorter's totally predictable post.
Seems like I was NOT wrong.
Yukon, I also told JLM that you were probably waiting to get your talking points from far right websites. So has Townhall commented on it, have they defended Sanford? Did they give you the talking points? I will have to look it up.
"Yukon, the word you want is ‘aspersions’, not ‘dispersions’."
SirJosephPorter, I gave you a chance to pull out your dictionary, when I purposefully misused a word. Too your credit, you spotted it!
The rest of your lame attempts to discredit my arguments are not worth a response.
Once again, for one who sanctimoniously declared that you won't pay any attention to my posts, you seem to be quite sensitive about my posts.
Figures! Hypocrisy need not go to the United States Senate. It resides right here among those of the liberal bent.
SirJosephPorter, I gave you a chance to pull out your dictionary, when I purposefully misused a word. Too your credit, you spotted it!
The rest of your lame attempts to discredit my arguments are not worth a response.
Once again, for one who sanctimoniously declared that you won't pay any attention to my posts, you seem to be quite sensitive about my posts.
Figures! Hypocrisy need not go to the United States Senate. It resides right here among those of the liberal bent.
On giving it some serious thought, I think I've finally got it- Conservative are just hypocrites about the things that Liberals don't frown on.