Louis Farrakhan Quotes

I do think sometimes people get morally superior without understanding situations.

Who are you to condemn another's sin? He who condemns sin becomes part of it, espouses it.

The virtue of some people consists wholly in condemning the vices in others.

The general tendency [is] to be censorious of the vices to which one has not been tempted.

Condemning others as bad or sinful is a way to feel righteous. Such a feeling is a powerful mood alteration and can become highly addictive.

If we say that anyone who 'moralizes' must be perfect morally then we are in effect saying no one can moralize.

If you can take the hot lead enema, then you can cast the first stone.

Showing your own righteousness by pointing out someone's unrighteousness, the race to the bottom, the transgressions getting smaller and smaller and smaller but still treated with the same level of intolerance and condemnation, all of that stuff, even as I say it I am talking about Twitter but I am thinking about Westboro.

Curiously enough, it is often the people who refuse to assume any responsibility who are apt to be the sharpest critics of those who do.

It is difficult to live with the pure. They do not condemn you; they forgive you. This forgiveness is more terrible than a judgment.

He always had a problem with the purity of others. Never his own.

I will not say it is not Christian to make beads of others faults, and tell them over every day; I say it is infernal. If you want to know how the Devil feels, you do know, if you are such an one.

We often think more highly of ourselves than we ought to, and it's easy to judge others and be critical of their weaknesses and shortcomings. But this self-righteous attitude is a sin that we can be blinded to because we're so focused on what the other person did wrong. The reality is this attitude is worse than the wrong behavior we're judging.

I'm always suspicious of people who repent of other people's sins.

What can everyone do? Praise and blame. This is human virtue, this is human madness.

To judge … any man … simply from his own point of view, is weak and illogical. History judges the man from its point of view. It condemns or applauds the point of view itself. The point of view of a malefactor is not to excuse robbery and murder. Nor is the spirit of the age to be pleaded in favor of the evil-doer.

In the E.U., there are always morally superior people who think they have to educate the others.

The suggestion that liberals aren't moralizers is so preposterous it makes it hard for me to take any of them seriously when they wax indignant about "moralizers." Almost every day, they tell us what is moral or immoral to think and to say about race, taxes, abortion - you name it. They explain it would be immoral for me to spend more of my own money on my own children when that money could be spent by government on other people's children. In short, they think moralizing is fine. They just want to have a monopoly on the franchise.

A cold, self-righteous prig who goes regularly to church may be far nearer to Hell than a prostitute.

There is an expectation that we can talk about sins but no one must be identified as a sinner.

Nothing makes one so vain as being told that one is a sinner.

Everybody likes to see somebody else get caught for the vices practiced by themselves.

Pharisaism is not a degeneration in a good man: a large portion of it is rather the condition of all being-good.

Personally, I'm tired of hearing the whole have-you-no-decency routine from people who have made quite clear that they possess none themselves.

Watch the too indignantly righteous. Before long you will find them committing or condoning the very offence which they have so fiercely censured.