Who's a hypocrite?

Hypocrisy is the only sin in the liberal lexicon. But what’s a hypocrite?

Before quoting two writers who challenge the popular conception of hypocrisy, I’d like to make an observation of my own:

Both Christians and non-Christians accuse Ted Haggard of hypocrisy. However, they accuse him of hypocrisy for different reasons:

1.Christians accuse him of hypocrisy because homosexual conduct (indeed, homosexual attraction) is contrary to Christian ethics. So he was guilty of conduct contrary to his public identity as a Christian.

2.But non-Christians accused him of hypocrisy because he was having a homosexual affair while opposing same-sex marriage.

Permit me to point out that #2 is a complete non sequitur. There’s nothing illogical, and therefore, nothing hypocritical, about an active homosexual (or bisexual) who opposes same-sex marriage.

He could oppose same sex marriage on many grounds.

He may regard the very institution of marriage as an antiquated social convention. For him, the notion of adultery is a ridiculous Victorian hang-up.

After all, it’s no secret that homosexuals are generally promiscuous. Ironically, Andrew Sullivan has made homosexual promiscuity an argument for same-sex marriage.

Or he may regard marriage as a natural institution for heterosexuals, but unnatural for homosexuals.

Or he may regard the push for same-sex marriage as a degrading attempt on the part of some of his fellow sodomites to seek social validation for their lifestyle.

Or he may regard the push for same-sex marriage as a degrading attempt on the part of some of his fellow sodomites to emulate the heterosexual lifestyle.

Is a raging sodomite like Gore Vidal a hypocrite because he opposes same-sex marriage?

[Question] Is the fight for gay marriage a legitimate objective for homosexuals?

[Answer] I take the position that as "homo/heterosexual" are adjectives describing acts, they can never be nouns. No person can be homosexual or heterosexual and the division of everyone into two teams is part of a stupidity to which Americans and Brits are particularly prone. Everyone is a mixture of desires and who does what with an agreeable partner is of no concern to society. Why have "gay" marriage when so much of our discontents and disorder came from heterosexual marriage?

http://www.salon.com/books/int/1998/01/cov_si_14int2.html

Hypocrisy
By William Vallicella

People like to accuse each other of hypocrisy, but I find that few bother to ask themselves what they mean by the word. The main point that needs to be made is that a hypocrite cannot be defined as a person who espouses high moral standards but fails to live up to them. For on that definition, all who espouse high moral standards would be hypocrites. Since to fall short is human, defining a hypocrite as one who fails to live up to the high standards he espouses implies that the only way to avoid hypocrisy is to renounce high moral standards, a course of action seemingly pursued by many nowadays. No one can call you a hypocrite if you have no standards, or standards that are easily satisfied.

No, a hypocrite is not one who espouses high standards and falls short of them: your humble correspondent espouses high standards, falls short of them on a daily basis, but is no hypocrite. A hypocrite is one who espouses high moral standards, but makes little or no attempt to live in accordance with them. He is one who pays ‘lip service’ to high ideals, by ‘talking the talk,’ but without ‘walking the walk.’ Someone who talks the talk, walks the walk, but stumbles a lot cannot be justly accused of hypocrisy. That’s my main point.

A second point is that there is something worse that hypocrisy, namely, having no ideals. One who pays ‘lip service’ to ideals is at least recognizing their legitimacy, their oughtness-to-be-realized. Such a person is morally superior to the one who avoids the accusation of hypocrisy by having no ideals.

Perhaps we need four categories. Saints espouse high ideals and never fail to live in accordance with them. Strivers espouse high ideals, make an honest effort to live up to them, but are subject to lapses. Hypocrites espouse high ideals, but make little or no attempt to live up to them. Scamps, being bereft of moral sense, do not even recognize high ideals.

http://maverickphilosopher.powerblogs.com/posts/1122572074.shtml

Is a gay who opposes same-sex marriage a hypocrite?
By Dennis Prager

Being an opponent of same-sex marriage and a closet homosexual (if that is what Haggard is) has nothing to do with hypocrisy.

As defined by every dictionary I consulted, Haggard is not a hypocrite. For example, the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language (Fourth Edition) defines hypocrisy as "The practice of professing beliefs, feelings or virtues that one does not hold or possess."

But we know that the Rev. Haggard never professed a belief that he did not hold. He believed at the time of his homosexual activities, and he believes now, that homosexual sex is a sin. He readily concedes that, in his view, he was sinning when he engaged in homosexual sex. He may therefore be considered a sinner, a person who acted inconsistent with his own admonitions and a poor model for a clergyman, but he is no more a hypocrite than a reverend who teaches the Ten Commandments and dishonors his mother or father, or bears false witness or even commits adultery. Hypocrisy requires a person to believe that he is the exception to the rule that he espouses for everyone else; that behavior that is wrong for others is not wrong for him.

If everyone who violates a standard he advocates is a hypocrite, the word is meaningless. And worse, it makes it impossible for just about anyone to advocate moral behavior.

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/column.aspx?UrlTitle=is_a_gay_who_opposes_same-sex_marriage_a_hypocrite&ns=DennisPrager&dt=11/07/2006&page=full&comments=true