“From my point of view, a great deal of openly expressed piety is insufferable conceit.”

If This Goes On— (p. 431)
Short fiction, The Past Through Tomorrow (1967)

Adopted from Wikiquote. Last update June 3, 2021. History

Help us to complete the source, original and additional information

Do you have more details about the quote "From my point of view, a great deal of openly expressed piety is insufferable conceit." by Robert A. Heinlein?
Robert A. Heinlein photo
Robert A. Heinlein 557
American science fiction author 1907–1988

Related quotes

William F. Buckley Jr. photo

“Though liberals do a great deal of talking about hearing other points of view, it sometimes shocks them to learn that there are other points of view.”

William F. Buckley Jr. (1925–2008) American conservative author and commentator

Up from Liberalism (1959); also quoted in The American Dissent : A Decade of Modern Conservatism (1966) by Jeffrey Peter Hart, p. 171
Variants:
Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.
As quoted in The Nastiest Things Ever Said about Democrats (2006) by Martin Higgins, p. 93
Liberals do a great deal of talking about hearing other points of view, but it sometimes shocks them to learn that there are other points of view.
As quoted in his obituary in The TImes (28 February 2008) http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/obituaries/article3447250.ece.

Chandra Shekhar photo

“I believe in expressing my view openly and in a forthright manner. After assuming the new responsibility, I will think over the matter and crystalize my approach. My government will do everything to take the country forward in all spheres.”

Chandra Shekhar (1927–2007) Indian politician

Source: Attar Chand The Long March: Profile of Prime Minister Chandra Shekhar http://books.google.co.in/books?id=YY4I36ZbJ7gC&printsec=frontcover, Mittal Publications, 1991, p. 18

Toshio Shiratori photo

“…the three Powers, discarding the ideologies of individualism and democracy, have adopted the principle of dealing with human society from the totalitarian point of view.”

Toshio Shiratori (1887–1949) Japanese politician

Quoted in "Honorable Enemy" - Page 258 - by Ernest O. Hauser - 1941.

Aldous Huxley photo
Zafar Mirzo photo
Henri-Frédéric Amiel photo
George Bernard Shaw photo

“Take the case of the extermination of Jesus Christ. No doubt there was a strong case for it. Jesus was from the point of view of the High Priest a heretic and an impostor. From the point of view of the merchants he was a rioter and a Communist. From the Roman Imperialist point of view he was a traitor. From the commonsense point of view he was a dangerous madman. From the snobbish point of view, always a very influential one, he was a penniless vagrant.”

George Bernard Shaw (1856–1950) Irish playwright

Preface, Leading Case of Jesus Christ
1930s, On the Rocks (1933)
Context: I dislike cruelty, even cruelty to other people, and should therefore like to see all cruel people exterminated. But I should recoil with horror from a proposal to punish them. Let me illustrate my attitude by a very famous, indeed far too famous, example of the popular conception of criminal law as a means of delivering up victims to the normal popular lust for cruelty which has been mortified by the restraint imposed on it by civilization. Take the case of the extermination of Jesus Christ. No doubt there was a strong case for it. Jesus was from the point of view of the High Priest a heretic and an impostor. From the point of view of the merchants he was a rioter and a Communist. From the Roman Imperialist point of view he was a traitor. From the commonsense point of view he was a dangerous madman. From the snobbish point of view, always a very influential one, he was a penniless vagrant. From the police point of view he was an obstructor of thoroughfares, a beggar, an associate of prostitutes, an apologist of sinners, and a disparager of judges; and his daily companions were tramps whom he had seduced into vagabondage from their regular trades. From the point of view of the pious he was a Sabbath breaker, a denier of the efficacy of circumcision and the advocate of a strange rite of baptism, a gluttonous man and a winebibber. He was abhorrent to the medical profession as an unqualified practitioner who healed people by quackery and charged nothing for the treatment. He was not anti-Christ: nobody had heard of such a power of darkness then; but he was startlingly anti-Moses. He was against the priests, against the judiciary, against the military, against the city (he declared that it was impossible for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven), against all the interests, classes, principalities and powers, inviting everybody to abandon all these and follow him. By every argument, legal, political, religious, customary, and polite, he was the most complete enemy of the society of his time ever brought to the bar. He was guilty on every count of the indictment, and on many more that his accusers had not the wit to frame. If he was innocent then the whole world was guilty. To acquit him was to throw over civilization and all its institutions. History has borne out the case against him; for no State has ever constituted itself on his principles or made it possible to live according to his commandments: those States who have taken his name have taken it as an alias to enable them to persecute his followers more plausibly.
It is not surprising that under these circumstances, and in the absence of any defence, the Jerusalem community and the Roman government decided to exterminate Jesus. They had just as much right to do so as to exterminate the two thieves who perished with him.

Harry Schwarz photo

“Whenever I draw up economic policy I look at it from the point of view of the person who has nothing; I look at it from the point of view of my farther who tried to get a job but could not.”

Harry Schwarz (1924–2010) South African activist

Sunday Times (18 November 1990).
Parliament (1974-1991)
Source: http://www.samedia.uovs.ac.za/cgi-bin/getpdf?id=2056613

Arthur Kekewich photo

“It is impossible for us English lawyers, dealing with the English language, to express our views except in the technical language of our law.”

Arthur Kekewich (1832–1907) British judge

Lauri v. Renad (1892), L. R. 3 C. D. [1892], p. 413.

John Leguizamo photo

Related topics