青蛙撞奶 ，会撞出什么火花？

Just a few days back, I come across this chinese idiom from my friend -"敬老尊贤",
At that moment, inspiration stroke me inexorably,
Due to the scarce of time I would not be able to scribble them here,
But now, it's the time for me to vend my feeling on these 4 chinese words.

"敬老尊贤" denotes that the youngs must respect the elders,
We are taught of this moral ethique since we're young,
Possibly dated back even to Primary One.
We are taught that the elders are the treasure in every homes,
They provide valuable life experience and entertainment to us,
They are the one to bring us up, shelter us, feed us, protect us,
Whatever you can think of, they're there to do their best.
Since they brought us up and contributes to what we are today,
It would be us to repay for what they have done,
It is a gratitude and a duty to act in vice versa,
What comes around must go back,
So whatever they give us,
It is our duty to return,
It is the love that we owe them.

While it seems appealing to us that this is the fact,
But I have a different perspective.

Firstly,
It might be true if it is against parents,
But what about the others who are older than us?
Are they included within the definition of the idiom?
The general meaning I've given above is overtly general,
Let's have a narrower dissect of the idiom.

敬 - Respect

老 - Old, But I'd prefer to define it as those who are older than us, but the word is still very ambiguous as it does not define the ambit of the age group. One may wonder how about those older than us even by few seconds? Must it be calculated in term of year?

尊 - Respect

贤 - Intellect or wise in certain manner

Therefore, the ambit seems to be quite wide! The idiom could convey 2 different messages.
a. Respect those older and respect those who are wise - 2 separate entities
b. Respect those who are older and wise - 2 attributes on 1 single entity

Which one does the idiom really refer to?

If it is (a), then the meaning is very wide indeed as the person who is older need not to be wise to be respected while those who are younger need not to be older to be respected. Either way, it works for the idiom. However, there then would arise a conflict.
What if these 2 categories of people come into conflict?
Who should be respected?
The elder? But why?
Isnt the idiom also require us to respect for the wise?
Shouldnt the older then also respect to the wise?
Vice versa, shouldnt the younger who is wise also respect for the elder?
Ideally both respect each others would clear the problem, but does it always happen as such in reality?
I often observe situation where the elders exploit their advantage to surpress the others.
For example, cut queue just on reason they're older.
Does the idiom really work this way?
I'd say no.

If it is (b), then definitely there would be another problem.
Does it mean that those who are older than us but do not possess the wisdom would not be needed to be respected as compared to (a) ?
This may be justifiable. Take an example, those who switch on the radio loudly when the youngers are studying. Do they earn the rank to be respected? I'd say no.

Secondly,
What is the ambit of the idiom? Do we need to adhere the idiom at all circumstances whatsoever? Of course the best answer would be "It depends" thereby setting one in the middle of the answer, neither to the extreme. I'd agree to this answer as situation must be observed first. Sometimes we dont even need to pay respect to some unsrupulous elders. They're not worth the cent, sometimes!

Thirdly,
Moral is a subjective issue. Who is the one that set the standard for right and wrong? The Gods? Metaphysical it might be true. But the reality seems that we would need to cast that aside first. I'd say moral is decided by we ourselves. We are the arbiters to decide what is moral and what is immoral. But who are us to decide this? What are we to consider the other is right or wrong specifically the issue targeted to the idiom. Therefore, it would seem to be public interest issue. The majority says that it's moral then it would be moral? Is it always the case? It seems not! The society has moved forward to democracy and we have our rights! Our authentic human rights that we're all equal before the law! Stop telling me that this postulate has often been violated. The comparison we're facing here is between ordinary members of the society. Between one ordinary citizen with another ordinary citizen, not in comparison with those who have special powers. Ok, fair enough we could continue. Since before the law we're equal, arent it justify our position? We're on the similar rank, no one is higher nor lower than another. So, where does this idiom fit into? Moral is different from law? Moral contributes to the rise of law? Possibly. But what govern the society? Moral or law? Perhaps they are interrelated.

Forthly,
How would the idiom reconcile with "孔融让李"? This idiom simply means that the elder would need to give in to the youngers. This is definitely clasing with "敬老尊贤". Therefore, it's a conflict of moral. A conflict that it is what we ourselves create. Putting aside parents but in comparison between ordinary citizens, which is to be reconciled? Does the elder must be respected at all time? My opinion is that, the elders are not always to be respected. Sometimes they are not worth for us to even consider the word "respect". Generally, we are all equal and the word "respect" should only apply to those who really could earn our respect. Certainly for a stranger there need to be a degree of respect. But the attribute would lost if the reality proves that he or she doesnt deserve it!

Above are all my personal thoughts and I am not intended to influent on anyone or to create any impact to anyone. I welcome constructive comment and also if you are free, you are most welcome to voice your opinion. Sorry for any error in grammar or typo.