Is the word "hate" overused in today's society?

[chobie]

Do you mean hate the sin yada yada? I don't know of any church that teaches to hate a sinner (since most churches beleive we are all sinners).

Who said anything about religion? As Ronda93 pointed out, its get hard to tell the difference between whether people are hating the act or the actors. Passing laws to keep consenting adults from marrying will not prevent them from committing the alleged "sin" it only serves to discriminate. Call it what you want, put Jesus' name next to it, dot the I's with a smilie face, it's still seems hateful to me.

 

[Twinkles6892]

Just wondering, if you think no words have power. If someone you loved and treasured said they hated you would that not affect you? Your SO, or your best friend?

It is just a word, but i do believe words have the power to hurt or to heal.

It's all in context. If they were acting like they hated me, and said that they hated me, it would be the action that would make me upset. If someone told me they loved me, and acted like it, their actions would make me happy. But if someone randomly came up to me and in a bland tone said that they hated me. I'd say, "Whatever" and walk away.

 

[Maleficent13]

I somewhat agree with Twinkles. It is just a word. Words only have the power with which we imbue them. Words were developed simply to articulate our thoughts and emotions to others. That is why profanities, etc, do not bother me. They are all just words. I am more concerned about the emotion behind the words, which is why when someone tells me they "hate" something or "love" something, I ask why. The true emotions and stories tend to come out then, using lots of words and descriptions.

FYI, if anyone wants to debate/rebut, I'm all for it, but I have to go home now and I won't have a computer until tomorrow! Just didn't want anyone to think this was a post and run!

ETA: Again I agree with Twinkles: it's the act, and not the word, which has the power.

 

[WDWHound]

Who said anything about religion? As Ronda93 pointed out, its get hard to tell the difference between whether people are hating the act or the actors. Passing laws to keep consenting adults from marrying will not prevent them from committing the alleged "sin" it only serves to discriminate. Call it what you want, put Jesus' name next to it, dot the eyes with a smilie face, it's still seems hateful to me.

Who said anything about passing laws?I personally beleive that the Bible leans more toward homosexuality being a sin, but I am for civil unions being available to all (gay or straight) and beleive the government should get out of the marriage business. Even so, I was once called hateful because I beleive homosexuality may be a sin, even though I sought to enforce those views on no one.

Even if I did seek to enforce those views, that doesn't imply hate. While there are certainly some who seek such laws out of hate, many think they see reasons why homosexual marriage or civil unions are harmful to society or damaging to those that practice it. You and would both disagree with that viewpoint, but that doesn't make those who support such laws hateful.

As I stated here earlier, someone on the debate board once proposed that taking away my right to worshiop would be a good idea. He was talking about trying to take away one of the most valuable things in my life, but I don't think he hated me and I never accused him of such. He had well thought out reasons for beleiving what he did, simply beleived those reasons were wrong, not hateful..

 

[chobie]

Even if I did seek to enforce those views, that doesn't imply hate. While there are certainly some who seek such laws out of hate, many think they see reasons why homosexual marriage or civil unions are harmful to society or damaging to those that practice it. You and would both disagree with that viewpoint, but that doesn't make those who support such laws hateful.

Too many of us discrimination seems hateful in whatever form it comes in. Whether or not peoples' views about homosexual marriage as being "harmful" to society" are actually rooted in hate, they come across that way.

 

[WDWHound]

ETA: Again I agree with Twinkles: it's the act, and not the word, which has the power.

But the word has consequences. Accuse someone of being a racist and you can destroy their career. Accuse someone of being hateful and you instantly pigeonhole that person and shape many peoples attitude about them.

Society still roots out hate becuase true hatred is an evil thing. However, the word hate is being used as a tool in more and more cases preciesely becuase society reacts against hate. So the consequences are still there, but the actions required to draw them are lessoned. People now only have to really dislike your opinion in order to assume hatred fuels it. This treand can only result in one of two things.

1) The eventually devaluing of the term hate to mean something less. Not a good thing in my book. It's a powerful, useful word that we need when real hate rears its ugly head.
2) The eventual removal of the consequences of hate. If minor acts become commonly labled as hate, than eventually the consequences will be made minor to match. This becomes a BAD thing when real hate shows up.

Words mean things. Right now the word hate is used to lable some with unpopular opinions, even though they may not hate at all. That, in my book, is wrong. Its harmful to the person being labled and its harmful to our language in the long run.

 

[chobie]

If there is any place that the word hate is overused, it would be the Bible. JMO of course.

 

[WDWHound]

Too many of us discrimination seems hateful in whatever form it comes in. Whether or not peoples' views about homosexual marriage as being "harmful" to society" are actually rooted in hate, they come across that way.

And therein lies the problem. Do you beleive the person who would havbe eliminated my right to worship was hateful?

Sometimes you have to look beyond the actions at the motavations. I am not saying you have to agree with such views. You may even find them ignorant or disrespectful, but hate is too powerful to accuse someone of if hate is not the motive

 

[Chipperdini]

Is the word "hate" overused in today's society?

Yes, and I hate that.

 

[WDWHound]

If there is any place that the word hate is overused, it would be the Bible. JMO of course.

Yes, that word apears a lot, but Jesus tells us to hate no one and to love everyone, even our enemys. He also taught that this is the most important thing we can do, second only to loving God.

 

[chobie]

And therein lies the problem. Do you beleive the person who would havbe eliminated my right to worship was hateful?

Sometimes you have to look beyond the actions at the motavations. I am not saying you have to agree with such views. You may even find them ignorant or disrespectful, but hate is too powerful to accuse someone of if hate is not the motive

That's one persons view on a debate board. The effort to deny rights to homosexuals is coming from national political and religious leaders. When people in these positions espouse hateful attitudes it incites truly hateful and evil people to commit acts of violence. A lone poster on a debate board has no power, they just have an opinion. I can see no other reason to discriminate against people other than hate.

 

[leighe]

Yes - hate is used much too frequently and too flippantly. When I was little saying, " I hate you" or " I hate that" was just as bad as using curse words. My parents taught us that words are powerful and once spoken can't ever be taken back. I have always been very concious of using the word "hate" as a result.

Many people throw around the word "hate" when they mean "disagree." For example, I think that homosexuals should definitely be allowed to marry, form civil unions, etc. However, I don't believe that people who don't believe that are "hateful" or "hate" gays and lesbians. To me, extremist rhetoric on both sides or any issues hinders honest debate and practical solutions.

 

[WDWHound]

That's one persons view on a debate board. The effort to deny rights to homosexuals is coming from national political and religious leaders. When people in these positions espouse hateful attitudes it incites truly hateful and evil people to commit acts of violence. A lone poster on a debate board has no power, they just have an opinion. I can see no other reason to discriminate against people other than hate.

So the motavation changes because of the number of people involved? If one person wants to out law gay marriage, but have no power, they are not hateful, but if 1000 with power want to do it, they are hateful? How is the motavation of hate a function of quantity?

There are lots of reasons to descriminate that are not hate based. In this case, you disagree with those reasons as do I), but that doesn't make them hateful. for example. Lets say that I firmly beleive that if gay people are allowed to get married, all the poodles on earth will expload (woof BOOOM!), and so I want to make gay marriage illegal. Does this mean I hate gay people or love Poodles? Is my view hate based, or just borm out of some poodle methodology and doctrine that you don't understand and find to be completly silly?

Some people who are against gay marraige feel it attacks the traditional definition of marraige. You may be disagree with this view, but they see themselves as defneding marriage, not hating gay people. I know you see no logic in this view (neither do I for the most part), but that doesn't make the view hateful. You can think the viewpoint is misinformed or even ignorant, but its not hateful.

I think the difference between us is that I look to the motavation whiule you look at the outcome. I beleive an act is only hateful if it is motavated by hate. Descrimination is bad, very bad, but it is not always motavated by hate.

 

[Maleficent13]

Lets say that I firmly beleive that if gay people are allowed to get married, all the poodles on earth will expload (woof BOOOM!), and so I want to make gay marriage illegal.

I know this is supposed to be a semi-serious debate, but that sentence made me spit my coffee...

Your argument makes sense to me, Hound. I think it is misunderstanding and miscommunication that cause a lot of the problems in society. We use language to obsfucate and hide our true feelings and intentions. But see I view this as a problem with actions, not language. (I'm finding it hard to explain what I mean; there are all kinds of people floating in and out of my office distracting me!)

Your argument has given me food for thought, though.

 

[ncgolfer]

Many people can't get past the fact that just because you disagree with something/someone they instantly assume you hate it/person. Some of the most hateful people on this board are the very ones who are constantly calling everyone else hateful.

 

[Galahad]

Lets say that I firmly beleive that if gay people are allowed to get married, all the poodles on earth will expload (woof BOOOM!),

What if you hate poodles?

 

[WDWHound]

What if you hate poodles?

Then I would say you were dogged by a hate issue and were going to hell in a hand basset.

 

[Maleficent13]

 

[chobie]

Many people can't get past the fact that just because you disagree with something/someone they instantly assume you hate it/person. Some of the most hateful people on this board are the very ones who are constantly calling everyone else hateful.

Yes and they are same ones that accuse everyone of "bashing" them for thier views, while at the same time they are bashing the other people's views. I know exactly who you are talking about.

 

[chobie]

Lets say that I firmly beleive that if gay people are allowed to get married, all the poodles on earth will expload (woof BOOOM!), and so I want to make gay marriage illegal. Does this mean I hate gay people or love Poodles? Is my view hate based, or just borm out of some poodle methodology and doctrine that you don't understand and find to be completly silly?

I don't know what it means but I do find it curious that every time the issue of gay marriage comes up someone always has to say something along the lines of "well if we let homos marry what's to stop us from letting someone marry an animal?"

What's with the fascination people who are against gay marriage have with bestiality anyway?