# Hypocritical wankers...Pit your fav **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [June 28, 2005, 11:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypocritical-wankers-pit-your-fav/310174 "2005-06-28T11:04:41Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Trunk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/87869e/32.png) [@Trunk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trunk)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2005, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypocritical-wankers-pit-your-fav/310174/41 "2005-06-30T18:45:45Z")
> [@Psycho Pirate](#): > > I’m sorry, but I disagree. There is nothing to disagree about. There’s no argument. There’s no room for opinion. What you really mean is, “I’m sorry, but I’m just going to continue to believe something erroneous.” ---
**Author:** ![Psycho\_Pirate](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Psycho\_Pirate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Psycho_Pirate)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2005, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypocritical-wankers-pit-your-fav/310174/42 "2005-06-30T19:14:15Z")
> [@Scott Plaid](#): > > It is a pretty stupid concept, that of probability=equals faith, so I don’t see where else it can be discussed. Faith: Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. Do you have any evidence that life has formed on other planets? Do you know with absolute certainty that life formed on this planet as science proposes? Do you know that there are conditions favorable to such a process being duplicated on another planet of the solar system? (I’ll give you a hint: all three answers are the same, and they both start with ‘n’ and end with ‘o’). > [@Trunk](#): > > There is nothing to disagree about. There’s no argument. There’s no room for opinion. > > What you really mean is, “I’m sorry, but I’m just going to continue to believe something erroneous.” There is too something to disagree about. You speak as though a belief in the possibility of aliens is a settled matter, as if 100% of the world agrees with you (or would, if only they were as enlightened as you). You are basing your belief on unproven evidence, whereas I base my belief on no evidence (at least, no evidence that science will accept). If you feel that gives you sufficient moral high ground to insult me, enjoy yourself, for all the good it will do. I note that you didn’t respond to any of my points, but chose instead to declare victory for yourself. I believe I’ll do the same. ---
**Author:** ![Scott\_Plaid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Scott\_Plaid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scott_Plaid)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2005, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypocritical-wankers-pit-your-fav/310174/43 "2005-06-30T19:20:01Z")
I do not believe based on “unproven evidence”, I live my life based on “more evidence then for your side.” There is no such thing as “unproven evidence”. > [@Psycho Pirate](#): > > If you feel that gives you sufficient moral high ground to insult me, . :smack: Insulting the concepts you have put forward, as in “It is a pretty stupid concept” does not equal insulting you. Get it straight! As for the rest of your post, I believe it speaks for itself. ---
**Author:** ![Nocturne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/9fc348/32.png) [@Nocturne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nocturne)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2005, 7:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypocritical-wankers-pit-your-fav/310174/44 "2005-06-30T19:22:58Z")
> [@Scott Plaid](#): > > I do not believe based on “unproven evidence”, I live my life based on “more evidence then for your side.” There is no such thing as “unproven evidence”. :smack: Insulting the concepts you have put forward, as in “It is a pretty stupid concept” does not equal insulting you. Get it straight! As for the rest of your post, I believe it speaks for itself. Maybe he’s a student of “Gay Science”? ---
**Author:** ![FilmGeek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/b19c9b/32.png) [@FilmGeek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FilmGeek)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2005, 8:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypocritical-wankers-pit-your-fav/310174/45 "2005-06-30T20:35:42Z")
Believing in the _possibility_ of life on other planets (which includes bacteria and other non-sapient/sentient beings too, by the way) is NOT the same as believing there is an all-powerful supernatural being that created the universe. I’m sorry you can’t see this. Not believing in your god doesn’t mean that I can’t hold out the hope that we’ll find bacteria on Mars. This is not hypocritical in the least, as the two are not opposites and, in fact, have _absolutely nothing to do with one another_. Probability seems to be beyond your grasp in this conversation… as does the fact that “aliens” doesn’t mean creatures that evolved in the same conditions that we did, as asserted in your last post. No ‘little green men’, in other words. Sorry for continuing the hijack. ---
**Author:** ![Sampiro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/2acd7d/32.png) [@Sampiro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sampiro)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2005, 9:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypocritical-wankers-pit-your-fav/310174/46 "2005-06-30T21:03:05Z")
Returning to the OP… All limousine liberals (but Sean Penn and Michael Moore especially with “word out” to the late John Lennon) who fulfill the Gilbert & Sullivan list item > [@G&S](#): > > Then the idiot who praises, with enthusiastic tone, > All centuries but this, and every country but his own while reaping insane benefits from a capitalist society with free speech (and seeming to have no idea that both require a military). Tom Delay for oh so many reasons, but among them championing morals (as defined, of course, by him) and family values while having no relationship with his own mother and siblings, lying about why he didn’t go to Vietnam (“Gee, I really tried, but they told me that black people had already taken all the positions…”) and for more financial misdealings than I can list in this post. To Jimmy Swaggart for passionately bashing gays in his sermons when he can barely find his way to a men’s room without getting caught with a cheap whore. To John Hagee for bashing liberals and gays and everybody else based on Old Testament laws but evidently having no problem with being a minister in spite of having left his first wife (and children) for another woman. To Mary Cheney for playing the good Sonderkommando by towing the party line and working on her father’s campaign in spite of the fact that denying her relationship any validity is a key point in his party’s agenda. (For that matter, to all Log Cabin Republicans- if your taxes matter more to you than your freedom then you deserve whatever you get.) To [Dave Roever](http://www.daveroever.net/) for preaching that all of the OT is still in force and thus unwed mothers and gays should be denied civil rights, yet strangely for not being able to find any of the passages forbidding a scarred man from serving as a minister. To every female minister for championing the Pauline preachings against (sorta kinda) homosexuality and other “social ills” but totally ignoring the “women- keep your wafer-holes shut in church”. To Bush for a million different reasons, but especially for praising military service as the greatest contribution while his own military service seems oddly non-existent and for changing his story 3,090 times about the War in Iraq. To every senator and representative who cried “OH! But life is precious! Howl Howl Howl!” when Terry Schiavo’s body was allowed to join her jello brain in death, and yet never once saw any ethical problem with capital punishment (with Kudos to the Brothers Bush for presiding over hundreds of executions without ever feeling the need to reexamine the evidence [in spite of the growing-every-year number of people released from death row due to DNA evidence they didn’t have access to at the time of their original trial]). To Ann Coulter for constant distortion of facts and outright lies while accusing liberals of the same thing. Dear Jove, but I’m not even warmed up and my fingers are already tired. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2005, 9:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypocritical-wankers-pit-your-fav/310174/47 "2005-06-30T21:05:43Z")
> [@Psycho Pirate](#): > > Faith: Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. Er, probability _is_ logical proof. > [@](#): > > Do you have any evidence that life has formed on other planets? Do you know with absolute certainty that life formed on this planet as science proposes? Do you know that there are conditions favorable to such a process being duplicated on another planet of the solar system? (I’ll give you a hint: all three answers are the same, and they both start with ‘n’ and end with ‘o’). Do you have proof the sun will rise tomorrow? No, you don’t. You only have the evidence of celestial mechanics and the fact that it has done so every day for the last three billion years to guide you to the _probability_ that it will rise again tomorrow. But surely you would not call an atheist who was certain of the sunrise a hypocrite, would you? > [@bouv](#): > > How is at any more consistant? Actually, I think it’s equally consistant. It just takes a bit more thought to recognize the internal consistency in our stance than in theirs. > [@](#): > > I’m pro-choice and anti-death lenalty as well, and to me, at frist glance, both are equally hypocritical. However, upon further analysis, I see my (and your) stance as less so, because at least in our minds, abortions are not the “killing of a young human,” but rather, the termination of an unwanted pregnancy. I don’t see abortions as killing a person, so in my mind, I’m not for the killing of one person and the saving of anther, but yet, for the pro-lifers and pro-death penatly, they are against killing of one form but not another, at least in their minds. I just don’t see how thy can justifty it to themselves, other than my argument of “well, the baby is sweet and innocent, but the murderer is evil and needs to die.” Well, yeah. And that’s what makes their argument internally consistent. They’re working from the axioms that a) a fetus is a human, and b) certain crimes are so heinous that the person who commits them forfeit their right to live. I don’t accept either of those axioms myself, but they are not inconsistent with each other in the slightest. > [@bouv](#): > > Last time I looked, the Bible said “judge not, lest yue be judged.” I’m no Christian, but I believe that passage is more nuanced than simply, “Don’t ever judge.” ---
**Author:** ![Reeder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Reeder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Reeder)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2005, 1:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypocritical-wankers-pit-your-fav/310174/48 "2005-07-01T01:12:50Z")
See my signature. I don’t think there is any person more hypocritical. ---
**Author:** ![Rubystreak](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e5b9ba/32.png) [@Rubystreak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rubystreak)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2005, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypocritical-wankers-pit-your-fav/310174/49 "2005-07-01T17:17:18Z")
For all those lackwits who claimed to the rafters that Terri Schiavo was (take your pick) looking at her mother and able to see and comprehend the world around her, able to be rehabilitated, not in a PVS, strangled or abused by her husband, not sufficiently cared for at any point in her 15 year decline, etc., who have not subsequently apologized to Michael Schiavo and/or admitted that they were wrong. The facts are the facts, folks. You made an innocent man suffer horrible accusations, many years in court, public vilification, and heartbreak, and now you don’t even have the decency to admit that you made a mistake. Respect for life? What about Michael Schiavo’s life? Plus, these “respect for life” people have no problem with executing teenagers and the mentally ill/retarded on death row, some have even called for the [impeachment of judges](http://www.gainesvilletimes.com/news/stories/20050417/opinion/95533.shtml) who won’t execute teens, while they simultaneously fight against abortion. So killing an older kid is OK, huh? They have shown an unwillingness to review cases of prisoners on death row when new evidence arises and rarely commute sentences. Hmm, I notice an inconsistency with this “culture of life” philosophy-- it should be “the culture of life that will get me the most RR votes.” ---
**Author:** ![Electrical\_Storm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ac8455/32.png) [@Electrical\_Storm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Electrical_Storm)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2005, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypocritical-wankers-pit-your-fav/310174/50 "2005-07-01T20:06:44Z")
> [@yellowval](#): > > I’ll see your Jeb Bush and, uh … well, you’re right, nobody’s as easy as those two. We’d have a pretty tough time finding anyone who fits the definition of “hypocritical wanker” better than the Bush Bros. We’d probably find the WMDs and evidence that Terry Schiavo wasn’t in a persistive vegetative state first. Quite possibly we’d also find the holy grail and a set of keys to Fort Knox, too. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2005, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypocritical-wankers-pit-your-fav/310174/51 "2005-07-01T20:56:24Z")
> [@TheLoadedDog](#): > > …as a agnostic-ish no-dog-in-this-race kinda dude, I love this “Xtian” thing. I’ve only ever seen it on these boards. I must say it looks POSITIVELY EVIL. Like some sort of belligerent alien race decending upon us in their B-grade Sci-Fi hordes… > > THE XTIANS ARE COMING! I, FOR ONE, WELCOME OUR NEW XTIAN OVERLORDS. > > Good stuff. Um, since, I, at least, got the abbrev. from noted Xtian author C. S. Lewis, & have been using it since I was rather young, (& possibly helping popularize it on this board) I find this response amusing. I had not thought of that, but yeah, I guess so! ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2005, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypocritical-wankers-pit-your-fav/310174/52 "2005-07-01T21:01:55Z")
Just so you know, it’s Xian, if by “X” you mean “Christ”. [/QUOTE] Oh, & Lib, I spell it Xtian, as in Ct, the first & last letters in the stem Crist-. “Xian” looks like a Chinese name to me, pronounced roughly, “Hsyahn.” ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2005, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypocritical-wankers-pit-your-fav/310174/53 "2005-07-01T21:04:49Z")
Agh! Where’s my [quote=Lib] tag!? Oh, yeah, hypocritical jagoff: I nominate myself, for continually hijacking threads for grammatical points… ---
**Author:** ![Earthing\_Continuity\_Resistance](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/9f8e36/32.png) [@Earthing\_Continuity\_Resistance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Earthing_Continuity_Resistance)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2005, 3:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypocritical-wankers-pit-your-fav/310174/54 "2005-07-04T03:53:55Z")
> [@](#): > > I am also aware that a) because I was very cross and b) because I had had a couple of glasses of wine…that I got the shitheads name wrong. You weren’t, perchance, conflating Capill and Brian Tamaki? Because you just know that the Bishop has a few dirty secrets of his own. I wish that Ngati Toa would get on Destiny’s ass about appropriating the haka for their rally of hate. ---
**Author:** ![Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e36b37/32.png) [@Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airman_Doors_USAF)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2005, 4:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypocritical-wankers-pit-your-fav/310174/55 "2005-07-04T04:23:45Z")
Dianne Feinstein, who very desperately wants to take away my right to own and/or carry a gun while holding one of the few prized California CCW permits. While I can’t confirm that she owns a gun or has ever carried one she has the right to, even as she rails against those very rights. ---
**Author:** ![Duke\_of\_Rat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ad7895/32.png) [@Duke\_of\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duke_of_Rat)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2005, 4:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypocritical-wankers-pit-your-fav/310174/56 "2005-07-04T04:34:55Z")
> [@Airman Doors](#): > > Dianne Feinstein, who very desperately wants to take away my right to own and/or carry a gun while holding one of the few prized California CCW permits. While I can’t confirm that she owns a gun or has ever carried one she has the right to, even as she rails against those very rights. Let’s not forget Rosie and Michael Moore, both anti-gun celebs who rail against gun ownership, yet who have both had bodyguards arrested for illegal carry. We aren’t supposed to have guns for protection, but it’s ok for them to be protected by them. ---
**Author:** ![Ice\_Wolf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/dfb087/32.png) [@Ice\_Wolf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ice_Wolf)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2005, 5:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypocritical-wankers-pit-your-fav/310174/57 "2005-07-04T05:52:25Z")
Re: the OP. Saying Graham Capill is a wanker is an insult to wankers. He’s a hypocritical shit. My tuppenceworth. ---
**Author:** ![Sampiro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/2acd7d/32.png) [@Sampiro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sampiro)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2005, 7:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypocritical-wankers-pit-your-fav/310174/58 "2005-07-04T07:50:42Z")
> [@Duke of Rat](#): > > Let’s not forget Rosie and Michael Moore, both anti-gun celebs who rail against gun ownership, yet who have both had bodyguards arrested for illegal carry. We aren’t supposed to have guns for protection, but it’s ok for them to be protected by them. I can’t remember his name, but I’m positive this happened and is not a U.L.: a few years ago one of the most rabid pro- gun control activists, a resident of D.C. (I remember that he was elderly [70ish], male and African-American] woke up to find a burglar in his house. Did he 1- discuss with the young man the error of his ways and suggest more positive win-win life strategies that set the young man on a new course (after, of course, getting his signature on a petition to expand the powers of the Brady Bill) or 2- waste him with an unregistered handcannon? Here’s a hint: The answer isn’t 1. More for my list: Paula Jones: she changed her story several times, swore that Bill Clinton made her feel like a cheap sexual object and that she hated the limelight, then posed nude for _Penthouse_ before getting her butt whipped by Tonya Harding as a celebrity boxer. Speaking of Paula Jones, one of her most rabid funders and promoters: Susan Carpenter McMillan. Among other major hypocrisies, McMillan is a longtime anti-abortion activist who in 1990 tearfully confessed (just before it was to be published in an investigative rag) that she had indeed herself had an abortion in college ca. 1970. She explained that it was this abortion which made her an activist. She had a harder time explaining why she had another abortion thirteen years later, which was also dug up by a reporter. At first she claimed it was a miscarriage, then that it was indeed an abortion but was necessary for her health, but neither report was supported by the evidence. For that matter, pretty much everybody involved in Monica-gate, but especially Ken “Keep those tobacco checks coming” Starr for having the nerve to swear he was non-biased and non-partisan (he was a decades long rabid GOP member). He also laughed about how he promised his wife he would dance at their wedding if she would convert to Christianity from Judaism, then reneged at the reception (as a Baptist and lunatic he finds dancing sinful). His incarceration of Susan McDougal and others is something right out of a totalitarian state and to quote the great Samuel Jackson “I hope he burns…in…he-yull!” ---
**Author:** ![HMS\_Irruncible](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hms_irruncible/32/7394_2.png) [@HMS\_Irruncible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HMS_Irruncible)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2005, 8:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypocritical-wankers-pit-your-fav/310174/59 "2005-07-04T08:19:54Z")
> [@Sampiro](#): > > I can’t remember his name, but I’m positive this happened and is not a U.L.: a few years ago one of the most rabid pro- gun control activists, a resident of D.C. (I remember that he was elderly [70ish], male and African-American] woke up to find a burglar in his house. This was Carl Rowan. He did wound an intruder, and he did occasionally write pro-gun control op-eds. But favoring rational gun control is not the same as favoring a gun ban, and you could hardly call him “rabid” or an “activist.” But this didn’t stop the slippery-sloper gun nuts from starting a shit-slinging fest that apparently continues to this day. It’s inspiring that the gun lobby propaganda machine reminds us of this 17 year-old event as if the man hadn’t even died 5 years ago. ---
**Author:** ![Muad\_Dib](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/35a633/32.png) [@Muad\_Dib](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muad_Dib)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2005, 8:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypocritical-wankers-pit-your-fav/310174/60 "2005-07-04T08:32:44Z")
> [@](#): > > “Mr Hackworth,” Finkle-McGraw said after the pleasantries had petered out, speaking in a new tone of voice, a the-meeting-will-come-to-order sort of voice, “please favour me with your opinion of hypocrisy.” > > “Excuse me. Hypocrisy, Your Grace?” > > “Yes. You know.” > > “It’s a vice, I suppose.” > > “A little one or a big one? Think carefully—much hinges upon the answer.” > > “I suppose that depends upon the particular circumstances > > “that will never fail to be a safe answer, Mr. Hackworth,” the Equity Lord said Reproachfully. Major Napier laughed, somewhat artificially, not knowing what to make of this line of inquiry. > > “recent events in my life have renewed my appreciation for the virtues of doing things safely,” Hackworth said. Both of the others chuckled knowingly. > > “You know, when I was a young man, hypocrisy was deemed the worst of vices,” Finkle-McGraw said. “It was all because of moral relativism. You see, in that sort of climate, you are not allowed to criticise others—after all, if there is no absolute right and wrong, then what grounds is there for criticism?” > > Finkle-McGraw paused, knowing that he had the full attention of his audience, and began to withdraw a calabash pipe and various related supplies and implements from his pockets. As he continued, he charged the calabash with a blend of leather-brown tobacco so redolent that it made Hackworth’s mouth water. He was tempted to spoon some of it into his mouth. > > “Now, this led to a good deal of general frustration, for people are naturally censorious and love nothing better than to criticise others shortcomings. And so it was that they seized on hypocrisy and elevated it from a ubiquitous peccadillo into the monarch of all vices. For, you see, even if there is no right and wrong, you can find grounds to criticise another person by contrasting what he has espoused and what he has actually done. In this case, you are not making any judgment whatsoever as to the correctness of his views or the morality of his behaviour—you are merely pointing out that he has said one thing and done another. Virtually all political discourse in the days of my youth was devotid to the ferreting out of hypocrisy.” > > “You wouldn’t believe the things they said about the original Victorians. Calling someone a Victorian in those days was almost like calling them a fascist or a Nazi.” > > Both Hackworth and Major Napier were dumbfounded. “Your Grace!” Napier exclaimed. “I was naturally aware that their moral stance was radically different from ours—but I am astonished to be informed that they actually condemned the first Victorians.” > > “Of course they did.” Finkle-McGraw said. > > “Because the first Victorians were hypocrites,” Hackworth said, getting it. > > Finkle-McGraw beamed upon Hackworth like a master upon his favorite pupil. “As you can see, Major Napier, my estimate of Mr. Hackworth’s mental acuity was not ill-founded.” > > “While I would never have supposed otherwise, Your Grace,” Major Napier said, “it is nonetheless gratifying to have seen a demonstration.” Napier raised his glass in Hackworth’s direction. > > “Because they were hypocrites,” Finkle-McGraw said, after igniting his calabash and shooting a few tremendous fountains of smoke into the air, “the Victorians were despised in the late twentieth century. Many of the persons who held such opinions were, of course, guilty of the most nefandous conduct themselves, and yet saw no paradox in holding such views because they were not hypocrites themselves—they took no moral stances and lived by none.” > > “So they were morally superior to the Victorians—“ Major Napier said, still a bit snowed under. > > “—even though—in fact, because —they had no morals at all.” > > There was a moment of silent, bewildered head-shaking around the copper table. > > “We take a somewhat different view of hypocrisy,” Finkle-McGraw continued. “In the late-twentieth-century Weltanschauung, a hypocrite was someone who espoused high moral views as part of a planned campaign of deception—he never held these beliefs sincerely and routinely violated them in privacy. Of course, most hypocrites are not like that. Most of the time it’s a spirit-is-willing, flesh-is-weak sort of thing.” > > “That we occasionally violate our own stated moral code,” Major Napier said, working it through, “does not imply that we are insincere in espousing that code.” > > “Of course not,” Finkle-McGraw said. “It’s perfectly obvious, really. No one ever said that it was easy to hew to a strict code of conduct. Really, the difficulties involved—the missteps we make along the way—are what make it interesting. The internal, and eternal, struggle, between our base impulses and the rigorous demands of our own moral system is quintessentially human. It is how we conduct ourselves in that struggle that determines how we may in time be judged by a higher power.” > > From _The Diamond Age_ > By Neil Stephenson When fighting over hypocrisy, he who wins is the one with no standards at all. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypocritical-wankers-pit-your-fav/310174.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypocritical-wankers-pit-your-fav/310174.md?page=4)