♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on May 5, 2010 12:34:44 GMT
Well mouse i still don't get it! Again the emotionally neutral question: What's so bad about a cigarette smoker condemning cigarette smoking? This is not the same thing as someone, who preaches honesty and constantly steals from others. Yes it is. The fact that you do something that you condemn makes one a hypocrite, no matter what the scenario. So you feel a cigarette smoker would have no right to discourage others from becoming cigarette smokers!?
|
|
|
Post by lonewolf on May 5, 2010 13:21:54 GMT
I don't blame those politicans for supporting legislation against homosexuality, even though they lapse into a darker form of it at times! So you actually think the government should be regulating the private sex lives of consenting adults? Politicans and people in general are usually not asked about their sexual practices either. And they shouldn’t be!
|
|
|
Post by Lauren on May 5, 2010 16:32:53 GMT
Yes it is. The fact that you do something that you condemn makes one a hypocrite, no matter what the scenario. So you feel a cigarette smoker would have no right to discourage others from becoming cigarette smokers!?They can discourage all they want to. It still makes them a hypocrite.
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on May 5, 2010 17:03:45 GMT
So you feel a cigarette smoker would have no right to discourage others from becoming cigarette smokers!? They can discourage all they want to. It still makes them a hypocrite. What total tosh. It makes them hypocritical when - and remember what addiction really means - they try to discourage other people from making the same mistake? I don't think so, somehow.
|
|
|
Post by Lauren on May 5, 2010 18:44:16 GMT
It makes them hypocritical when When they say, while smoking a cigarette, or planning themselves to smoke a cigarette later, "You shouldn't smoke. It is bad for you." That is hypocritical. A person who does something they discourage others from doing is a hypocrite. Plain and simple. Let's remember what the definition of a hypocrite is: a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelingsA smoker telling someone not to smoke because it is bad for their health is contradicting themselves BECAUSE they know it is bad, yet they still smoke. They are telling others to watch their own health, but have no regard for their own. That is a hypocrite. They are putting their feelings and beliefs onto others, but not themselves.
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on May 5, 2010 19:55:12 GMT
Novak,
That smoking is bad for you is neither a 'feeling' nor a 'belief' - it's a fact.
I see nothing hypocritical about an addicted smoker advising others not to smoke.
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on May 5, 2010 21:09:05 GMT
It makes them hypocritical when When they say, while smoking a cigarette, or planning themselves to smoke a cigarette later, "You shouldn't smoke. It is bad for you." That is hypocritical. A person who does something they discourage others from doing is a hypocrite. Plain and simple. Let's remember what the definition of a hypocrite is: a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelingsA smoker telling someone not to smoke because it is bad for their health is contradicting themselves BECAUSE they know it is bad, yet they still smoke. They are telling others to watch their own health, but have no regard for their own. That is a hypocrite. They are putting their feelings and beliefs onto others, but not themselves. Planning to smoke a cigarette? Who plans it? If a smoker abstains long enough they absolutely crave a cigarette. Addiction is no joke and its not black and white. Why refrain from giving good advice based on personal experience? I can't see that wishing to help spare someone the risk of awful diseases is in any way the act of an hypocrite. I'd say that you're take on this is far too simplistic. Clutching at straws, even.
|
|
|
Post by Lauren on May 5, 2010 21:22:02 GMT
Novak, That smoking is bad for you is neither a 'feeling' nor a 'belief' - it's a fact. Which is clearly stated EVERYWHERE. A person just has to buy a package of smokes to see the potential risks. Everyone knows smoking CAN cause cancer, not WILL. People can go their whole lives smoking and be unaffected. It's really a game of chance. Some are lucky; others aren't. How come? The addicted smoker is TELLING someone NOT TO smoke, and yet, that addicted smoker does. That is hypocritical. They FEEL others (besides themselves) shouldn't pollute their body with cigarette smoke. That is a hypocrite.
|
|
|
Post by Lauren on May 5, 2010 21:30:46 GMT
Planning to smoke a cigarette? Who plans it? People who begin smoking in the first place, for one. And then smokers plan smoke breaks throughout the day (I've seen my dad do it; my grandfather do it; my friends at school do it; co-workers do it; ect...) I didn't say it was. See, you are missing the definition of a hypocrite. It's not like it's an ex-smoker telling someone not to smoke. This person is still smoking, while telling someone else not to smoke. Doesn't matter if the advice is good or not; by definition they are a hypocrite. Then why don't they take their own advice? Why not instead of having another cigarette they go on the patch, or try gum? Something? Not give in so easily. It is simple, because a hypocrite is a hypocrite.
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on May 5, 2010 21:46:37 GMT
Planning to smoke a cigarette? Who plans it? People who begin smoking in the first place, for one. And then smokers plan smoke breaks throughout the day (I've seen my dad do it; my grandfather do it; my friends at school do it; co-workers do it; ect...) I didn't say it was. See, you are missing the definition of a hypocrite. It's not like it's an ex-smoker telling someone not to smoke. This person is still smoking, while telling someone else not to smoke. Doesn't matter if the advice is good or not; by definition they are a hypocrite. Then why don't they take their own advice? Why not instead of having another cigarette they go on the patch, or try gum? Something? Not give in so easily. It is simple, because a hypocrite is a hypocrite. Simple is as simple does, I guess.
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on May 5, 2010 22:00:59 GMT
Anna there is no mention, suggestion, hint or clue that these are miserable repenting sinners. None of the examples (with a massive cautionary note based on trubbles post above) are about them admitting publicly that they are doing something of which they are ashamed and would want to stop. They are (on the face of it, bearing in mind Trubbles post above) saying in effect: " I am doing this in secret but I choose to deny you the opportunity to do something that I enjoy" A Cigarette smoker might very well be miserable in his addiction and could happily campaign against smoking if indeed he does so admitting he is doing something he knows to be wrongI see nothing to say that is the case with these people caveats galore, naturally. Dearest Jade! A lot of homosexuals themselves would tell you that it's better to become heterosexual, if possible. I can't imagine that the politicans in your link find/found any forefillment in their sexual lapses! It just looks like cheap quickie sex! I'll bet they were disgusted with themselves afterwards! Male homosexuality is especially notorious for sex without bonding or commitment. I don't blame those politicans for supporting legislation against homosexuality, even though they lapse into a darker form of it at times! Politicans and people in general are usually not asked about their sexual practices either.
At least i had some emotional bonding in my affairs so it would be easier to call me a "traitor" or a "hypocrite"!it's damn hard to bond when you're always looking for sex in a public bathroom
|
|
|
Post by june on May 5, 2010 22:03:30 GMT
I think saying smoking is bad, passing laws to stop it and then flouting those laws yourself is hypocritical.
Just saying smoking is bad and smoking yourself isn't.
To say homosexuality is evil, ban it and then indulge yourself in secret is hypocritical.
|
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on May 5, 2010 22:20:05 GMT
So you feel a cigarette smoker would have no right to discourage others from becoming cigarette smokers!? They can discourage all they want to. It still makes them a hypocrite. I think saying smoking is bad, passing laws to stop it and then flouting those laws yourself is hypocritical. Just saying smoking is bad and smoking yourself isn't. To say homosexuality is evil, ban it and then indulge yourself in secret is hypocritical. As an ex smoker i'm a rather militant non smoker and do what i can to get people off this addiction!
As far as homosexuality goes I suggest we let God judge the morality of homosexuality! To those who don't have a clear sexual orientation-in particular young people- i will continue to discourage a homosexual direction, although my heart has at times been caught up in this. Feel free to call me a hypocrite!
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on May 5, 2010 22:23:43 GMT
Planning to smoke a cigarette? Who plans it? People who begin smoking in the first place, for one. And then smokers plan smoke breaks throughout the day (I've seen my dad do it; my grandfather do it; my friends at school do it; co-workers do it; ect...) I didn't say it was. See, you are missing the definition of a hypocrite. It's not like it's an ex-smoker telling someone not to smoke. This person is still smoking, while telling someone else not to smoke. Doesn't matter if the advice is good or not; by definition they are a hypocrite. Then why don't they take their own advice? Why not instead of having another cigarette they go on the patch, or try gum? Something? Not give in so easily. It is simple, because a hypocrite is a hypocrite. by definition they are a hypocrite no hon, by definition it is NOT. as several have said, telling someone not to do something that you know is bad, but do yourself, is not hypocritical. it would be hypocritical to tell someone that you don't smoke, so they shouldn't either, and then you do smoke. by your reasoning, telling a child to not put his hand on the stove is hypocritcal because you burned yourself doing it when you were a child and now you're telling him not to. that would apply to anything and everything that you told someone as a benefit of your own experience exactly the same thing.
|
|
|
Post by Lauren on May 5, 2010 23:02:48 GMT
no hon, by definition it is NOT. Yes it is. That's the definition of a hypocrite though. Yeah, only if I am still doing the things I'm telling others not to do. Burning oneself on a stove is unintentional and an accident. Smoking a cigarette is intentional. Hypothetically, if I was a hard-core drug user, and I am discouraging others from doing drugs, but then after I discourage people, take more drugs that makes me a hypocrite because I am saying one thing, and doing something completely different to what I am saying. Same with a smoker.
|
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on May 5, 2010 23:47:54 GMT
no hon, by definition it is NOT. Yes it is. That's the definition of a hypocrite though. Yeah, only if I am still doing the things I'm telling others not to do. Burning oneself on a stove is unintentional and an accident. Smoking a cigarette is intentional. Hypothetically, if I was a hard-core drug user, and I am discouraging others from doing drugs, but then after I discourage people, take more drugs that makes me a hypocrite because I am saying one thing, and doing something completely different to what I am saying. Same with a smoker. Dearest Novak, In your example of being a hard core drug user there is a difference. If you deny having ever been involved with hard drugs and preach against drug abuse, while continually taking hard drugs, i can understand the hypocrisy accusation. Still i like this type of drug abuser better than the one, who tries to get others hooked!
If you admit you have a problem with hard drugs and try to warn others about drug abuse, while you gradually go the way chronic drug addiction leads people to, that's different! I don't see anything hypocritical about trying to warn others about some deadly habit that you're caught up in.
Some passions and addictions are almost impossible to stay away from 24 hours a day and 365 days a year. If God doesn't help us our puny human will power doesn't hold up for long!
|
|
|
Post by Lauren on May 6, 2010 0:34:26 GMT
Dearest Novak, In your example of being a hard core drug user there is a difference. If you deny having ever been involved with hard drugs and preach against drug abuse, while continually taking hard drugs, i can understand the hypocrisy accusation. But can't you also understand why others would view people who tell you not to smoke, while smoking a cigarette themselves as hypocrites too? I mean, what if the other person really wanted to smoke? No one has the right to tell others what to do with their own bodies, and it is especially hypocritical when the person telling you you shouldn't smoke is smoking right in front of you. It only becomes hypocritical if you still engage in the act. It wouldn't be hypocritical if you no longer participate in the act you are warning others not to do. I mean, would it be hypocritical of me to tell my sister she can't get married because 50% of marriages lead to divorce, and then I go get married myself? It's only impossible if YOU think it is impossible. I mean, what's wrong with saying No?
|
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on May 6, 2010 3:52:51 GMT
Dearest Novak, In your example of being a hard core drug user there is a difference. If you deny having ever been involved with hard drugs and preach against drug abuse, while continually taking hard drugs, i can understand the hypocrisy accusation. But can't you also understand why others would view people who tell you not to smoke, while smoking a cigarette themselves as hypocrites too? I mean, what if the other person really wanted to smoke? No one has the right to tell others what to do with their own bodies, and it is especially hypocritical when the person telling you you shouldn't smoke is smoking right in front of you. It only becomes hypocritical if you still engage in the act. It wouldn't be hypocritical if you no longer participate in the act you are warning others not to do. I mean, would it be hypocritical of me to tell my sister she can't get married because 50% of marriages lead to divorce, and then I go get married myself? It's only impossible if YOU think it is impossible. I mean, what's wrong with saying No? Dearest Novak! Again the cigarette smokers, who stay hooked, but discourage others from getting hooked are my favorite smokers! Much more pleasant than the nicotine addicts, who try to get others hooked!
I see all sorts of negative conditions that people have and rightfully condemn! What about people, who can't control their temper! They know that's wrong and may need therapy to get help! Why shouldn't they condemn their outbursts, when they're lucid?
I guess you're one of those idealists, who believe that will power can and will triumph over everything! "You can always say no!" I consider this theoretical talk and this "idealistic innocence" makes me smile!
I could have never quit smoking with will power, but that's a different story.
When we Christians say the Lord's prayer part of it asks the Lord to "lead us not into tempation!" I'm just too imbecile like to resist some temptations, if they are placed in my path and so easy to indulge in. All of us have certain individual weaknesses and the person, who claims will power can always triumph is perhaps falling into the pride trap, which Christ especially condemned!
Isn't it pride too that makes us resistant to anyone criticizing any aspect of our life style, ourselves or whatever? Isn't this stupid "political correctness" supporting these proud and whiny people that can't accept some people asking them critical questions?
I generally thank people, who criticize me for their honesty and openess! Why should they have to hide their views, justified or unjustified?
|
|
|
Post by mouse on May 6, 2010 8:09:39 GMT
as a smoker..i would certainly preach against smoking and do so to my grandchildren that doesnt make me a hyporcrite..it makes me a weak and foolish person who cannot kick the habit if however i was smoking secretly pretending not to smoke while telling them not to engage in the habit that would make me a hyporcrite
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on May 6, 2010 11:24:27 GMT
Novak, if you're going to swallow a dictionary, make it a good one.
Hypocrisy noun: 1 the act of pretending to have feelings, beliefs or principles which one does not actually have. 2 the act of concealing one's true character.
A smoker who advises someone against starting the habit neither pretends to have feelings, beliefs or principles which they do not actually have, nor do they conceal their character.
QED
Have you noticed how you are in a minority of one?
|
|