I don't understand what you're saying.

Don't you find it weird that doing the bad thing but agreeing that it is bad is... okay, while deciding the thing is okay is... heresy?

[delayed]

It seems logical. Analogy: I want to be healthy but I am imperfect so I will end up over eating or skipping my workout. Versus: I embrace being unhealthy and fat as part of my identity.

In one, you try to be better but aren't always successful. In the other, you've embraced the bad.

beliefs control acts.

otherwise you're <insert name of belief>, in name only.

mercy and justice are apprioriate outcomes for breaking the rules, not just 'yolo whatever i believe so everything is permitted'.

That's also true.

There what someone believes, and what someone says they believe.

People are (ought to be) in state of continual improvement.

To complicate things, there's then "being a hypocrite as a preliminary stage of changing oneself". If I know a behaviour is condemned by my principles/faith and yet I still do it, then so long I am working towards change, I'm still resisting that thing, it's... well, not all good, for sure, but it's something. And you can work with that.