Hate Is Not A Family Value

Recently posted on the Center For a Just Society website, my thoughts on “Hate Is Not a Family Value,” beginning with,

The other day I saw a car displaying the bumper sticker, “Hate is not a family value.” As slogans go, I thought, this one is just about perfect. Packed with emotional impact, in just six short words it exposes the hypocrisy of “family values” proponents. That’s the intent, at any rate, and it works well so long as one doesn’t break the First Rule of slogans: Don’t think too hard about them, just swallow them whole.

Commenting Restored

The comment function here has been out of service, possibly causing frustration, for which I apologize. You can comment again now, and it will save and post as it should do. First-time commenters' comments will not appear, however, until approved in moderation.

11 thoughts on “Hate Is Not A Family Value

  1. Tom, the two articles to which you linked (from ’87 and ’90) were incredibly interesting reads. I’d never seen them before. Thanks.

  2. Tom, you say disagreement does not count as hatred, and I agree. However, there’s another issue here. I’ve heard that Christians are told to hate the sin but love the sinner. But what about the unrepentant sinner, what about the sinner that actually takes pride in his sin, who sets himself directly against God’s command? This describes the gay-rights movement in your view, does it not? God hates this kind of sinner, enough to send them to hell in traditional doctrine, that much is clear. Is it wrong for Christians to also hate this kind of sinner?

    Psalms 139:21-22, KJV

    Do not I hate them, O LORD, that hate thee? and am not I grieved with those that rise up against thee?

    I hate them with perfect hatred: I count them mine enemies.

    Is this verse still valid? If so, I would say gays may be right to feel hated by Christians. Is this kind of hatred compatible with family values? I think David, at least, would say that it is.

  3. woodchuck64:

    You’re anthropomorphizing God to fit into your preconceived notions, and it’s affecting your ability to understand (let alone interpret) the Scriptures. God hates ALL sin–it is not compatible with His nature (to say the least), and sin is not compatible with our nature–at least in terms of what God wants for us. A sinner who intentionally sins is really the one who hates God–not the other way around. The hatred came from us, not from God. In fact, what was God’s response? Permitting creatures, created in His image, to commit deicide as an expression of His Love. What would have happened if the harlot (rightly) accused of prostitution by the mob had responded to Jesus by saying, “Uh, no thanks, I’m not a sinner and I don’t need Your forgiveness and mercy”? From whom is the rejection and hatred originating? Sounds to me like the gay “rights” movement pretty much fits that bill… especially given their tactics over the past, say, 20 years.

  4. Tom,
    Isn’t it a matter of tolerance/intolerance?
    The gay propaganda machine (not me) says:

    “I accept your lifestyle, I accept my lifestyle.
    You accept your lifestyle, you don’t accept my lifestyle.
    Ergo, you hate because you don’t tolerate my sexuality.”

    (It just seems a lot of those words have become too loaded… and it’s hard to reason with people).
    But that, I think is the frontline: understanding tolerance.

  5. First thing’s first: tolerance is not a virtue, but it can turn into a vice.

  6. That’s a matter of definition. If tolerance is defined as a matter of loving another person in spite of disagreement, that’s a virtue. If tolerance is defined as openness to all values or opinions, it’s likely to be a vice. Open-mindedness is often understood to be a virtue. Being open to all evidences and reasons (being willing to examine and evaluate them) certainly is virtuous. Being open to all conclusions most certainly is not.

  7. Holopupenko,

    You’re anthropomorphizing God to fit into your preconceived notions, and it’s affecting your ability to understand (let alone interpret) the Scriptures. God hates ALL sin–it is not compatible with His nature (to say the least), and sin is not compatible with our nature–at least in terms of what God wants for us. A sinner who intentionally sins is really the one who hates God–not the other way around.

    If God hates sin but not the unrepentant sinner, why not send the sin to hell rather than the sinner?

    In any case, whether God hates sinners or not is not really relevant to my question, let me redact:



    God hates this kind of sinner, enough to send them to hell in traditional doctrine, that much is clear.

    Any other thoughts on my comment now that this correction has been made?

  8. Tom:

    Yes, it is a matter of definition: both virtues and vices are habits that if practiced enough become “second nature.”

    Your definition “a matter of loving another person in spite of disagreement” is not that of virtue but of charity (love). Tolerance is not a habit, it’s–literally per the etymology–PRUDENTLY (prudence IS a virtue) putting up with something bad… until the “putting up” part becomes a sin of omission in not stopping it JUSTLY (another virtue) when the act either puts others in physical or moral danger, i.e., until prudence dictates when the bad thing must be stopped before it wrecks havoc.

    On the other side of the coin, “openness to all values or opinions” is not a vice because it itself is not a habit… which means I got ahead of my headlights and was not completely correct in calling it a vice. Sloth and imprudence are the vices that bouy “openness to all values or opinions.” In other words, if one is “open” to homosexual acts it is because either speculatively or practically (or both) one does it imprudently and intellectually lazily… with likely the vice of pride rearing its ugly head.

    Otherwise, your point is well taken.

    woodchuck64:

    I’m sorry, but I can’t take this question seriously: If God hates sin but not the unrepentant sinner, why not send the sin to hell rather than the sinner? And, I have nothing further to say on the clear point I made in responding to your comment… even with the “correction.”

Comments are closed.

Subscribe

Subscribe here to receive updates and a free Too Good To Be False preview chapter!

"Engaging… exhilarating.… This might be the most surprising and refreshing book you’ll read this year!" — Lee Strobel

"Too Good To Be False is almost too good to be true!" — Josh McDowell

Purchase Here!

More on the book...

Goodreads

Too Good to be False: How Jesus' Incomparable Character Reveals His Reality

Serving with:

Discussion Policy

By commenting here you agree to abide by this site's discussion policy. Comments support Markdown language for your convenience. Each new commenter's first comment goes into moderation temporarily before appearing on the site. Comments close automatically after 120 days.

Copyright, Permissions, Marketing

Some books reviewed on this blog are attached to my account with Amazon’s affiliate marketing program, and I receive a small percentage of revenue from those sales.

All content copyright © Thomas Gilson as of date of posting except as attributed to other sources. Permissions information here.

Privacy Policy

%d bloggers like this:
Clicky