For now, the pregnancy of Governor Sarah Palin’s seventeen year-old daughter will grab the bold-type in headlines far and wide – particularly in the blogosphere. It will give the lefty rat-a-tat-tatte
Is there a word more overused – or rather, misused than “hypocrite?” Somehow, worse than almost anything else that a human being can do or be, there is practically nothing that can compare morally, or is as downright ugly or unforgivable as being a hypocrite. Once that label has been given to someone, it clings insistently, like being labeled a racist, a homophobe or an environmental crusader (which, by the way, carries more weight than being a hypocrite, as I will explain momentarily).
Without equivocation, I despise hypocrisy as much as anyone. With equal fervor, however, I hate seeing the excessive maltreatment of the word by people who don’t know how to make a cohesive and substantive argument otherwise. Governor Sarah Palin is a strong and steadfast conservative, and the very fact that her teenage daughter became pregnant out of wedlock has mobilized the laptop hammering left into action. Liberal blogs everywhere are already unleashing on the Palins, attacking them incessantly as hypocrites.
So much for the party of compassion.
The distinction needs to be made between being inconsistent and being a downright hypocrite. Indeed, I have done things – as has each and every human being in existence – that are inconsistent with my values. It is intrinsic to being the flawed creatures we are. To veer away from paths we know are wrong for us, or are contrary to personal convictions, is not always possible. That’s the way it is.
Ladies and gentlemen, I’d like to introduce you to the human being. I’d like to introduce you to inconsistency.
To be inconsistent does not mean the value system being compromised is invalid. It means that human beings are not perfect. Unfortunately, the ever-adamant smear merchants who exist in the blogosphere and elsewhere are quick to pounce on a human failing and run with it. If a flaw exists in someone, they reason, then all of the positions and advocacies associated with that person must also be contradictory. By that logic, if someone robs a convenience store knowing that theft is against the law, the law is invalid and should then be repealed.
Sometimes, the strength of a good message cannot adequately dissuade the bad behavior of those that wish to adhere to it. An evangelist, for instance, who weakens and seeks out sexual pleasure outside of marriage could be called inconsistent (and certainly an adulterer), despite all the good he does preaching to the contrary.
If, for the sake of argument, talk show host Rush Limbaugh, during the time of his addiction to pain killers, continued to speak passionately about the evils of doing drugs, as he always had, but instead of trying to deal with the addiction and admit his weakness, tried to rationalize his narcotic use on the air and get himself off the hook with his listeners, wouldn’t that be indicative of more than sheer inconsistency? In other words, if Rush played the “It’s okay for me, but not for you” card, wouldn’t that be a true hypocrite?
I think a good case can be made for it.
As I alluded to earlier, as much as the word “hypocrite” will stick with someone once the label is given, to be called an environmentalis
In the case of the pregnancy of young Bristol Palin there was not so much as a hint of, "This is okay for me, but not for you." Now that she has made her decision – the correct one I will add – to not only keep the baby but to marry the child’s father, it is time for fair-minded people to acknowledge the consistency in those actions … and move on. How ironic it is, in this case, that if the pregnancy would have been terminated, the left would not have given a second thought for the child that was killed, but would have spent all its time going on and on about hypocrisy of the act – and would have actually been correct this time.
TrackBack URI for this entry
Subscribe to this comment's feed
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
