Opinion

What to do with “hate”

I write for a pretty large audience about a very divisive topic, so I get quite a bit of negative feedback in the form of comments, e-mails, tweets, and Facebook messages. I don’t read all of it, or even most of it. Some of what I do see is constructive and interesting, but enough of it is not that I usually just skim over it. Sometimes people call me names or question my intelligence, motives, or talent as a writer.

I don’t consider the negative attention to be “hate.” It’s disagreement, some of it strong, but it isn’t “hate.”

In the past several years this word has begun to be overused, to our detriment. “Hate” is something deep and serious. It is instantly recognizable and intends to wound. But recently people have begun to fling this word around every time someone disagrees with them. “Hate” is now intended to mean anything seen as “intolerant” or “judgmental,” since nowadays the only sin most people believe in is believing in sin. So basically, if you disagree with it, you can call it “hate,” and your opponent, fearing that they might be seen as hateful, will probably stop arguing.

Political correctness was born in the 1970s, bloomed in the ’90s and is par for the course today. It has turned communication in government, academia, and — increasingly — regular old daily life into an Orwellian nightmare of counterintuitive regulations. No one argues that it isn’t hateful to use racial epithets, but according to the new rules of political correctness, I can be glared at in certain company if I say “Merry Christmas” instead of “Happy Holidays.”

For the most part I ignore these rules. I tend to ignore rules unless someone can give me a good reason to follow them. No one has been able to convince me that there’s anything wrong with saying “Merry Christmas.” The argument “It might offend someone” doesn’t work for me. I make it a point not to get offended because being offended is for little girls. Saying “I’m offended” is a weakling’s way of avoiding an argument. You won’t hear the words leave my mouth.

It’s the same thing as saying “hate speech.” If you want to call something hate speech, make sure it is actually hateful. Yelling the N word at black people could be called hate speech. Calling gay people names to hurt their feelings may be hate speech. Saying abortion is murder and people who commit it should be treated as criminals? That’s not hate speech. That’s an opinion. Calling someone a moron because I think they’re, well, moronic? That’s not hate speech. That’s an opinion.

Mouth CoveredIt is incredibly important that we argue honestly and with courage. Make no mistake: calling you intolerant, judgmental, or hateful is intended to shut you up. The PC police have been so effective that many people are now afraid they will be discounted, marginalized or shut down if they don’t play by these new tyrannical speech rules.

Don’t be afraid to call a thing what it is. Language is powerful and important, and the freedom to express ourselves is essential to our liberty. Over time some brilliant writers — Orwell comes to mind first — have dramatized for us what happens when language is usurped by tyrants. Once they have our words, they have our thoughts, and when they have our thoughts, well, they pretty much have everything.

There is a lot of lip service paid today to the ideas of love and compassion. No one denies love and compassion are wonderful things, but do not forget: severity, too, has its place. Harshness toward the thing you are fighting is an act of love for that thing for which you fight. To use World War II as an example, we were harsh to the Axis forces because we loved the Allies. We loved the free West, so we opposed those who would destroy it. Anyone demanding we be loving and compassionate to Hitler and his armed forces was effectively silenced by all the sane people who knew we had to wage war to save millions of lives.

Many of us believe in a moral code that tells us to love our enemies. That doesn’t mean we stop fighting them. It means we fight them not out of loathing or fear, but because we love goodness.

The enemy we fight is the abortion industry. There are probably good people working in the abortion industry who don’t know that what they’re doing is wrong. We can love them all, good and bad, but we still have to stop them.

Everyone’s favorite word these past few years is “tolerance.” It is seen as the ultimate good, to tolerate that of which you disapprove. The ultimate evil, then, is intolerance. Nowadays the only evil left is believing anything is evil. Tolerance, like many things, can be good in certain circumstances, but we must be wary of it. Going back to World War II again, to use a dramatic example, there were people who disliked but still tolerated the Jews, right up until they started murdering the Jews, and then many of the same people tolerated the Nazis. It can be a dangerous habit to develop.

Refuse to tolerate the intolerable. People will tell you that you are intolerant because you oppose abortion. They will tell you that you are engaging in hate speech when you argue against it. Embrace your intolerance of abortion. Don’t deny that you hate the act of murdering an innocent person.

Live Action on Facebook
  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=21403276 Carolyn Svellinger

    I’m glad you wrote about this.  Attacking the opposing side’s verbiage and rhetorical manipulation of making someone feel guilty about taking a stand against something outrageously wrong is exactly what many people need to hear.  
    Peter Kreeft writes:
    “[...]God is a lover who is a warrior. The question fails to understand what love is- what the love that God is, is. Love is at war with hate and betrayal and selfishness and all love’s enemies. Love fights. Ask any parent. Yuppie love, like puppy love, may be merely “compassion,” but mother love and father love is war. ‘God is love’ indeed, but what kind of love? Back to our data: does the Bible call him ‘God the puppy’ or ‘God the yuppie’? Or is it ‘God the Father’?”

    Yes, we love the people who oppose and tell us we are using “hate speech”. But it is with love that we should continue to fight against the evil of abortion.  Prayer, and confidence in the good, the holy, the God-given dignity of a human life.

    Thanks for your article!

  • Leah

    Name calling is not an effective or sensible way to argue one’s view. The opposition is more likely to listen to and hear the message if it is not full of fruitless speech. We should most definitely stand firm in our beliefs but if we truly want to love people to the truth, then calling them a “moron”, or anything of the like, is not the way to do it. The facts are on our side as pro-lifers…if we stick to the facts and deliver the truth with compassion, I believe we’ll see the change we’ve all been praying for.

  • Theresa

    Excellent article!  Well written and eloquent.  Thank you, Kristen!

  • dave

    well said – one troublesome thing though:  to call someone moronic is pretty hateful.  in common usage, there are certain words – like moron, or “N” – that have been loaded up with hate, and you can’t escape it.  you can say that moron is a real word, that has a real actual definition, but in real common use, it is just insulting.  if you believe that someone’s idea is moronic, you can manage to come up with something to say that is less emotionally charged

  • Bijoybalan

    Well if Intolerance is a good thing then why accuse the Pro-choice crowd of intolerance. What a waste of time, but what else does pro-life crowd do beside waste their time. If I find a pro-choice who are intolerent then Live Action should be pro-abortion by their own critirea

  • Meg

    WOW!! An amazing article!! Thank you for sharing HONEST and TRUTH-FILLED thoughts. I totally agree!!!