An example of this double-standard can be seen with a 19 year old college student decided to become a porn star and took part in a video for a internet porn site.\u00a0 As a consequence of her stint as a porn performer, people criticized<\/a> and belittled her.\u00a0 After a life of a troubled upbringing (including parents arrested for drug dealing), this was the final straw for her and she committed suicide<\/a>.\u00a0 As tragic as this was, another college porn queen, and “Womens Studies<\/a>” major, the infamous Belle Knox<\/a>, used it as an excuse to condemn<\/a> “bullies” who would not tolerate people who did and said things they did not like.<\/p>\n Funny, then, how neither Belle Knox, nor the student who took her own life, are held to a standard where they are subject to the consequences of their actions.\u00a0 What were the consequences?\u00a0 Merely criticism by others exercising their free speech to disagree with what those teenage porn stars were doing.\u00a0 There are claims that there was harassment of the porn queens, but is that very different from the proverbial pitchfork wielding mobs that that were responsible for Eich’s ouster?<\/p>\n Similarly, Michael Sam was free to smooch another man, but was also responsible for dealing with the consequences of his action, which again is the criticism of others.\u00a0 Yet for Michael Sam, as well as Belle Knox, their behavior and speech are protected and held sacrosanct.\u00a0 It is those who merely express disapproval who are targeted.\u00a0 If Jones is fully responsible for his speech, and the rabid mob that went after him, when why isn’t Sam fully responsible for the very mild disapproval aimed at him?\u00a0 If it is acceptable to viciously go after Jones and threaten his very job, then why wouldn’t it be for acceptable for Jones to not<\/em> try to threaten Sam’s job but only express disapproval!<\/p>\n This is because “some\u2026 are more equal than others.”<\/p>\n Mere disagreement has become bullying and oppression, while true bullying and frothing mobs riling against simple disagreement becomes simple criticism.<\/p>\n Why the disparity?\u00a0 Simply, the hypocrites will apply whichever standard is useful at the time, and then turn 180\u00b0 when it is useful to do so.<\/p>\n But this goes far beyond that.\u00a0 These hypocrites will go after people for merely disagreeing<\/a>, even if that disagreement had nothing to do<\/a> over which they are being targeted!\u00a0 Just for merely disagreeing, you can become a target in all things, including your job or even your bank account!\u00a0 By disagreeing, you become a “legitimate” target<\/a> for persecution, to be hounded out of your job or other associations, even if you job or associations have nothing to do with why you are persecuted in the first case. This becomes acceptable because people are free to pressure companies to not associate with the bad people with whom the hypocrites disagree, because the 1st <\/sup>Amendment does not protect how one private person or entity chooses to associate with another, if at all.\u00a0 Yet, if these same companies or private persons acted that way with those hypocrites, those hypocrites would yell about oppression, discrimination, and claim government protection.<\/p>\n Even those who agree<\/em> with the hypocrites views on what is acceptable or abhorrent will be subject to the proverbial pitchfork wielding mob if they are not part of the blood-thirsty mob<\/a> to enforce those view!\u00a0 It becomes acceptable to get a company to fire an employee for simply stating that they believe that a person has a right to be wrong!\u00a0 It becomes acceptable to bully a person into exile from “polite society” for doing nothing but state that people are allowed to disagree.<\/p>\n Express an acceptable behavior or the correct speech, and you will become free of criticism, however mild it may be, with the power and privilege of declaring those who dare disagree to be evil incarnate.\u00a0 Express “incorrect” speech, and you will receive now protection, but only the wrath of an angry mob.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The same people who declare that their speech and behavior ought to be sacrosanct, tend to be the same people who are leading the proverbial pitchfork wielding mob. Brandon Eich was hounded out of Mozilla for believing that marriage was … Continue reading ![\"\"](\"https:\/\/impeachreno.org\/politicalhat\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/03\/hypocrisy_meter.jpg\" "\\"hypocrisy")
<\/p>\n