it isn't fair

 Hypocrites, we all despise them. It is a name we use to disparage and vilify those we don't agree with. We point out their hypocrisy, pointing our fingers and saying, see there, he's a hypocrite! And just what is a hypocrite? The dictionary says it is someone that pretends to be one thing and are just the opposite. The hypocrite reads the bible and tells others what it says and then does the opposite. Hypocrisy on all levels in a terrible thing, right? Well, that's the thinking on that when you are the one calling the other the hypocrite. Personally, you always have a reason for acting the way you do. There is an exception. And you are that exception to the rule. And that's the thing isn't it, rules? If you don't break any of the rules you aren't a hypocrite. The only issue being, who is making the rule? 

 The question really is how many of us follow the rules? Do we only follow the rules when we figure others will know whether we did or not? That's the basis for hypocrisy. Making believe. It's the ethical question of doing the right thing even when no one is looking. But when doing the right thing, obeying the rules, does the motivation matter? What I mean is, does it matter why you are doing right? We certainly are quick with the excuses and reasons for doing wrong, the explanations are as numerous as the stars in the sky. Seldom is it asked, why did you do the right thing. When something goes in our favor do we question motivation? Yes, sometimes we do and then it's called suspicion. Our first thought will not be, I guess they are just a good person. That isn't what happens. 

 It seems to me the modern solution to this dilemma is the dismissal of the rules. Laws are the ethical values of the country. Being a good citizen requires obeying the law. But a lot of people these days have convinced themselves that is somehow ethical to disobey "bad" laws as a matter of course. The "bad" laws are the ones that somehow interfere with what you want to do. The thing is however that you are still obligated by virtue of your citizenship to obey those laws. It is still unethical to break them indiscriminately. If everyone simply acted in that way, we would have nothing but chaos. There are avenues to change whatever law you feel are "bad" ignoring the existing law isn't one of them. It is the society itself that must change the laws, not the individual. Remember laws are the ethical values of the country, not the individual!

 So yes, there is a level of hypocrisy that we all live with and support. Not one of us follow all the rules. That's why we have a legal system, a department of justice. The purpose of that system is to delineate the punishment for any infractions of the law. How bad was it? It is the search for justification that concerns justice itself. When a mutual agreement can be reached between the one offended and the perpetrator, we say justice was served. It doesn't mean everyone was justified, or correct, just that a settlement was reached. When the state wins the case, it is because the ethics of the country were upheld. When the perpetrator wins it's because we decided, it wasn't that bad a breach. We talk about the motive. Was it justified? 

 Our country is a Christain nation. That's a simple statement of fact. Our constitution is founded in Judeo-Christian principles and ethics. Now those founding fathers were wise men indeed and did not establish a state religion. The reasons for that are many, and all are valid. That doesn't mean that the overall ethics, virtue, and sense of right and wrong contained in the bible aren't an integral part of our society. They certainly are, or were, depending upon your viewpoint. There are precepts in that book that were codified into the laws of the land. Thou shall not kill is one of them, but exceptions have been made, when killing is justified. It is only the degree of justification that has changed over the years. Indeed, many today believing capital punishment, for any degree of crime committed is not justified! Many others believing the terminating of a life is now a viable choice when that life is inconvenient, unplanned, or simply unwanted. What is the motive? 

 I don't know, I don't have any answers to any of this. I do know life was better when people at least pretended to be good citizens. Our laws reflected what we knew to be correct, the right thing to do and those laws were enforced. Was everything perfect? No, it certainly was not. Still things changed over the years, corrections were made, and real progress realized. Progress on a national scale, not necessarily on an individual scale. That speaks to the old adage, you can please some of the people some of the time, all of the people some the time, but you can't please all of the people all of the time. There will always be those whose ethics and values are in contradiction to the society in which they live. We call them, bad people. The minority will always be in contradiction to the majority! That isn't injustice, that is reality.   Reality is what you believe it to be. I've heard that lately from some professors and scholars. The truth is reality is what you perceive it to be, to you alone! I do not have to accept that as reality at all. My reality is real, that's how that works. The laws of a nation, the rules of society, are the extension of perceived reality for the entire group. The acceptance of that reality is an ethical issue, a value to be determined by yourself. Just because you are in contradiction to that reality that doesn't make the reality wrong. In fact, it's the law, the general consensus of right and wrong. The majority opinion. It's how it works. In fact, it is the only way it could work. That's true even when you are the minority. Yeah, I know, it isn't fair.