A double standard is a harsher or stricter attitude against someone else than one holds about himself or strangers. Causes of double standards include a lack of forgiveness and political bias.
Many people undergo dramatic life changes when they wake up to their own double standard, and recognize how they are:
- holding conservatives to a higher standard than liberals
- slow recovery after a hurricane when the president is Republican is his fault, but if the president is a Democrat then it isn't
- liberals are just fine with theories of conservative conspiracies, but decry any such claim against liberals as a "conspiracy theory"
- getting angry when personally lied to, yet raising no objection to liberal deceit
- believing what is taught by liberals in school before believing what is taught in the Bible
- holding grudges against others who acted no worse than one's friends
- disparage voters when liberals lose, but act like majority vote means something special when liberals win
- immediately believe anything that is contrary to the Bible, yet reject numerous counterexamples to liberal theories
- question the truth of what conservatives say, while rejecting any questions about the truth of the Democrat claim that Obama is a Christian
The son finally decides to return to his father in the Prodigal Son when he realizes that among the people he left his father for, "no one gave him anything," in contrast to his father's generosity. The son had been applying a double standard against his father, but no longer.
A useful approach to avoiding double standards in family situations is to "treat your friends like family, and your family like friends." Had the Prodigal Son done that, he never would have senselessly suffered as he did.
Examples of liberal double standards include:
- When the Republican Majority Leader Trent Lott made a remark with racial implications, he was forced to resign; but when the Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid made a far more offensive racial remark, liberals defended his remaining in power.
- Wealth by a liberal, such as the tens of millions of dollars made by Al Gore, John Kerry, and Bill Clinton, is just fine; but wealth by a Christian preacher or Republican politician such as Mitt Romney is somehow unacceptable.
- Global warming: Supporters of the Kyoto Protocol (an emissions reduction treaty) say that "correlation is not causation" when scientists point out the dozens of natural climate cycles linking changes in sunspots to changes in Earth's air temperature. But their argument for a runaway greenhouse effect is based on a single period from 1850 to present in which carbon dioxide levels and air temperatures have risen together.
- Evolution: Ardent supporters of the Theory of Evolution blindly accept any study that purportedly "proves" their theory, without addressing (or even allowing the criticism of) any flaws in such studies. But when it comes to alternative theories (whether it be Creationism, intelligent design, or something else), the same people immediately reject them without even studying the details.
- Wikipedia is much harsher in describing conservatives and sites perceived to be conservative. Compare, for example, Wikipedia's entries on Conservapedia and Scholarpedia.
- Liberals supported and participated in a prayer for the late Ted Kennedy led by the chaplain for the House of Representatives, which expressly and repeatedly referenced the Lord, yet the same liberals insist on the censorship of classroom prayer.
- The lamestream media are just fine with Hillary Clinton meeting "with a group investigating the disappearance of American aviator Amelia Earhart." If a Republican Secretary of State did that, then they'd be called a "conspiracy theorist"!
- Liberals blame conservatives for SOPA even though it came out of Hollywood. Attack Lamar Smith almost exclusively for it, even though Republican Hollywood supporters are an abnormality, and give Patrick Leahy, Al Franken, and Chris Dodd a pass for advocating the same thing because they're Democrats.
- Democrats running primaries kicking party members like Joe Lieberman out of their party for disagreeing with them on an issue and having disdain for the decades-nonexistent 'Blue Dogs' and "centrist" Democrats, and yet constantly lecturing Republicans on how they should tolerate any amount of liberalism in their party up to and including voting with the Democrats on any issue and endorsing them for President. Indeed, if Republicans are unsatisfied with even the most severe RINOs, they're "intolerant" "purists" and the Democrats claim to have the higher ground.