Twisting Hypocrisy Into Moral Favor

I wish to take issue with Jonathan Last (“Dangerous Liaisons,” Opinion, Aug. 12). Hypocrisy is a real moral failing, and there is something distinctly suspect in his defense of it. While there may be some truth to the suggestion that a certain level of it is desirable, Last completely and quite wrongly overstates its value.

Hypocrisy is not synonymous with morality, as Last would seem to have it, and should not become a substitute for morality. It is not unreasonable to expect people to live up to their own stated standards. If those most inclined to judge others were among the least hypocritical rather than the most, this wouldn’t be such a problem. After all, is it really Bill Clinton’s fault that the very people most loudly condemning him for his adultery were themselves guilty of the same offense?

Leigh Walker

Compton

*

Last’s opinion about hypocrisy being the only mortal political sin was another example of jumping on the “everything is Clinton’s fault” bandwagon. So, it is the “modern” liberals, shaped by the Clinton years, who resent hypocrisy. The funniest conclusion by Last is that somehow a hypocrite at least has shame (Clinton was shameless; that is why he didn’t become a hypocrite). I guess it must have been these same liberals who came up with the idea that those who never sinned shall cast the first stone. Or the notion that you shall not judge, because those who judge will be judged by the same measure.

George Martinovich

Costa Mesa