There is widespread disagreement in every aspect of our lives, permeating politics, religion, and even mundane issues like mask-wearing, often leading to verbal and physical confrontations. Society frequently resorts to the notion of agreeing to disagree, reflecting deep divisions on various subjects. The argument that widespread disagreement justifies labeling a law as unjust is being used to challenge moral laws, suggesting that diversity of opinion within society renders certain laws or policies invalid. This false reasoning, rooted in satan's promotion of self-opinion, has led to a culture where individuals do what is right in their own eyes, lacking a shared moral standard. Within the church, differences of opinion have existed since its inception and persist due to human nature. The false premise of widespread disagreement has influenced some church members, with arguments for changing teachings based on the notion that brethren desire change or find doctrines too hard. Unity in the church should not rely on uniformity of opinion but on mutual appreciation and the collective pursuit of truth, recognizing that no single individual holds all knowledge. Personal opinions, even among Christians, must be founded on the basics represented by Christ Himself, demonstrating His mind in all matters.

A double standard often manifests in the form of opinions that are inconsistent or contradictory, reflecting a pretense of virtues or beliefs one does not truly hold. The continuous shaping of consciousness through conflicting opinions can render individuals unwilling and unable to think deeply on any subject. In the realm of politics, ambiguous expressions serve to bridge the gap between words and actions, often programming the mind to accept detrimental policies without critical thought. Social media also reveals double standards in opinions, where one person's expression is deemed free speech, while another's is labeled as hateful or intolerant. Individuals who reject a consistent moral standard and replace it with shifting opinions lack true convictions, holding only preferences that are easily altered. Such a double-minded approach results in instability, as a person vacillates between conflicting views, torn between different influences, and remains insecure and indecisive in their ways.

In a world marked by deep divisions, opinions on various issues are sharply fragmented, leaving little room for harmony. People struggle to accept differing views, driven by pride that elevates their own perspective above all others. On the contentious issue of abortion, a recent survey revealed a significant split among Americans: 49% support keeping it legal in most situations, 42% advocate for it to be illegal in all or most cases, 15% favor legality in every situation, and 19% prefer it to be illegal in all cases. Even among evangelicals, only 78% believe the practice should be illegal in all or most cases, highlighting a surprising diversity of opinion. The survey summary indicates that while abortion continues to divide, the debate appears to be shifting, with the issue becoming less relevant compared to other concerns. This persistent division over such a grave matter reveals a troubling callousness in attitudes across society.