DISHONESTY CONQUERS HONESTY

This is a cheap topic, I thought. We all know that honesty is the best policy and it would be a moral test to think otherwise.  There is nothing as bad as getting a man off what he believes in. What about if we discussed this as our debate topic? Definitely there will be more or equal points from either side. It was so until we endorsed this as one of our AOB in Ufahamu Diaries Group meeting. I was ready to disapprove any proves that honesty is not the best policy. It was nowhere in my thoughts that honesty isn’t the best policy because a wrong has never justified a right. I waited for the reasons in eagerness as we handled the major agendas for the day.

Honesty is not the best policy ‘always’. I wondered why my friend had started the topic with an addition word-ALWAYS. Like many other liberal views that come with rationale words to distort the original meaning and give room for personal justification, I started thinking that he was definitely going to drill in my thick reasoning.

Praying Silhouttes: picture source: imgkid.com

Good conquers evil. But I have always thought that the opposers in any ‘straight’ motion take the day. This is because they have nothing to defend and preserve but room for experiments and illusions. They have nothing to lose. Talk about the opposition in government that daily gains mileage. Aren’t the gay people continuing to become more normal? What about the atheists? Oppose and gain mileage! At the end, evil takes the day.

If a person storms into a room full of people at gun point with an order that he will be shooting people according to their first names in an alphabetical order, what would be your name? As if to imagine that all would die, there would be no need of adopting letter ‘z’ just to be shot last. Another person would think that the killer would soon run out of bullets at letter ‘n’ probably. Perhaps the police or a savior may have arrived to save the innocent souls. Though one may have saved own self by adopting letter Z that would be a dishonest move. Why did you lie so that others die before you?

To good, reply with good and not vice versa. How should a dishonest move be responded to so as remain in the margins of honesty? The Biblical Abraham had to request Sarah to lie to pharaoh that she was his sister. What a move from the Man of Faith! It was aimed at protecting his life from the ‘dishonest’ Pharaoh who would have killed the couple. Does this mean that we can justify ourselves in dishonesty by being dishonest? The dishonest Pharaoh’s wife had opted to lure Joseph into adultery. The refusal of Joseph led to his jail sentence. Is that what honesty can do? If Joseph had died in Prison just like John the Baptist, one would say, ‘why dint he had saved his life by hearkening to the master?

A friend from USA who was in attendance spiced the discussion by engaging the motion proposers. During the Jewish holocaust, Jews sort asylum from sympathizers. If they hid to your house and the Nazis came raging asking whether you knew of any Jews around, what would you say? Would you be dishonest to the Nazi’s by saying that the Jews were not in? Saving the life of Jews through a lie would be appropriate in logic and emotion. But it was dishonest to the Nazi soldiers. However, they did not deserve anything good since they were dishonest by wanting to kill.

A dishonest face-the face of life.

As if the discussion was not enough, a question of delinquency arose. If a child came along with a porn piece of paper, asking what the figures in the drawings were up to, what would you tell the innocent mind? Some would request the child to do away with the bad piece of paper and ask where it came from so that more papers are not found. One said that he would briefly tell the child that those are human beings without adding much. This is in condition that the child is innocent to sexual matters. All the responses would be dishonest for the true answer would be that the people are naked in the sex act. But telling the child what is ‘adequate’ is not dishonesty.

Being dishonest to a dishonest man is more proper than being honest to the dishonest. A fool is never grateful of anything! To the honest, be honest. However, the best justice to a dishonest one is to let them understand their ways without really getting dishonest revenge from the honest person who would want the dishonest person to face his craftiness. Is this even understandable? I mean, life is more than just being honest. Who is the custodian of honesty?

Talk of a lecturer who announces that all student's who've not been attending classes to step aside as others settle for a CAT. She requests students to be honest. The word makes some shoot up so soon so quickly. Thinking they will only explain of late fees payment and have their way as comrades, she tells them to seek permission letter from the Registrar Academics. Gosh! I wish I never stood up if this is what honesty brings. It is like walking to a police station to report a crime before you become the first suspect. A re-sit waits for us.

Let us be honest without compromising the importance of critical thinking. It is stupid to be honestly foolish. Honesty, like dishonesty are leeways to have my own way.