hypocrits

i think everyone's noticed those few hypocrits tunning around- not practicing what they are preaching (like the catholic priest child molesters, etc.). Anyway, i don't know if it's just me, but I have never met anyone who, in the religious (and moral) sense, practiced what they preached. Only the obvious examples come to mind- Ghandi, Dr.King (but he was an adulterer), Archbishop Ramero (he saved El Salvador). Where did they all go?

And on a side politico-religios point, how can Bush claim he is so religious and god-fearing and yet want to destroy lives of innocent people?

There are a lot of hypocrites; thats for sure.

With regards to your side politico-religious point, I don't think he *wants* to destroy lives of innocent people (can't believe I'm defending Bush). Maybe he's protecting the lives of the innocent people here in America. Just another way to look at things.

Bush must take iraq to save dick chaney because he did illegal trading with them. Germany and france must stop the war because they did illegal traiding with iraq. read the book other theory,s of james tate. Who killed kennedy? Joe DeMageo Mr Coffee he found out John and Bobby were humping Marlin monroe. A Chapter you may find of interest america look were we are now just because you did not want to pay a tax on tea. Another theory if god is a woman then why do we have football? I am not pro war but how else do you get the madmen to go. No we do not belong in northern Irland. Another question answered. And people wonder why I drink with a mind like this what else is there to do. As for sins I only regret one I do not treat my Den good enough why she puts up with me I will never know. I need to get out for awhile think I will take some time away luv to all and good luck I will drop back in awhile.

James

lol james very funny about the tea. And football exists to keep the men from underfoot.

pheonix thanks for pointing out my error. I was being a *little* harsh on bush. No he doesn't want to kill innocent people- just one mean person and anyone who agrees with him. But he still hasn't given me enough reason to want a war with iraq-the only reason that I would agree with is the was saddam treats his people-especially the kurds (who I will keep on mentioning because I think they are the poorly overlooked ones in world)

prarllex-nice answer. But i'm going to find something to argue with you about it anyway after I think about it some more🙂

We all like to show off our knowledge. Your post-about the slow road and living up to standards- reminded me of a book I read a while ago- "A Knock at Midnight". It was a collection of M. King's sermons. I think you'd find them very interesting.

Hmmm...yanno, of course there are hypercrites out there, but like everything, there is the other side of the fence too. I have no doubt that there are religious or spiritual ppl who DO practice what they preach, in their everyday lives. You may never hear from these ppl, or know them b/c they lead ordinary lives. Hypercritical behaviour can be seen on a two tier level (from your question)...the individual and the institution of religion itself. It is rather a conundrum, and one I feel somewhat effects me too (most probably wrongly so). B/c of the atrocities of the Anglican Church towards the indigenous ppl's of the Opaskwayak nation (can comment only on this one, b/c this is the one I have first hand knowledge of), I harbour animosity towards that religion as a whole. It is a wrong position to be in (reasons as para suggests), but I can't help it. And therefore that makes ME a hypercrite for not practicing what I belive in...'acceptance'. I guess it is a juggling type thing. You can accept things for how they are, but at what point do you draw the line? For me, it is when human rights have been violated, as well as an attempt at cultural genocide. While the practice does not occur today (that I am aware of), the fact that no apology nor restitution has been offered to the native ppl for the atrocities, means that I still have a problem with it. I have many friends and family members that are members of this church, yet I harbour no animosity towards them, they are decent ppl, and THEY all practice what they preach. Bizzarre isn't it? I think the frailty here is called humanity.

This is really interesting that this "humanity" question suddenly came up, because I was having a really interesting conversation with a freind about why when people use the word humanity and being "humane" the usually are reffering to the good, gererous, and kinder qualities of human beings. It seemed to me that humanity should have just as many bad connotations as good, because certainly humans are not made up of all the qualities considered "humane". I thought that "humane" was rather a stupid word for it's meaning. However, he argued that people are inherently good, as everyone has some moral sense in them, and therefor humanity is inherently good, despite it's faults. He is in this sense a terrible optomist. I certainly don't believe that people are inherently good, nor are the inherently bad, they're just caught up between different values. Hypocracy occurs as a result, because of the choices people make between thier different values. I think for some people a lot of time the values they assume to have are taught to them by their society, family, or religion. In these cases people may go out a preach a certain moral standards, and then completely disreguard these standards in their own life, because they deep down perhaps don't truly believe in them, as they were taught to them and were not inherent in their nature. Instead, they value something else which was inherent in their nature. Of course, this is completely cicumstancial and depends on the person. A lot of times it's a "do as I say not as I do" type deal. Most people's hearts are in the right place, even if they do err. I suppose that's why "humane" has a good connotation.

Sounds like your friend believes in 'Natural Law'. A topic I am studying in Legal Theories at the moment. Humanity to me is everthing we are..the good, the bad, the indifferent. Sentient Beings striving to find their way in this crazy mixed up world. I am still undecided as whether humans are 'inherently good' or not. I think it all depends upon other circumstances, eg. the way we are raised, the regime we live under, etc. The only thing at this stage that I feel sure about is that no one should cause harm to another (inherently good? or preconditioned?) Ah well. Now I must go and search the net to find info on natural law supporting marriage where one party has had a gender change. Such is life.