Does challenging superstition or faith protect people?
Is it mistaken to support organised religion in membership or donations?
If people do good because they are human, not because God prompts them,
is it right to risk giving God any credit when they alone own their good?





Religion advocates cold-blooded hatred and dresses it up so that it still manages to come up smelling of roses. I am referring to its doctrine: “Hate the sin but love the sinner”. That translates as, "Abuse the sin not the sinner" and "Judge the sin as worthy of punishment but not the sinner". When you put it like that you see straight through it.


The husband who beats his wife to a pulp because of her adultery will say it happened because he loves her. He will even believe that. This alone shows the doctrine of loving sinners and hating sins is dangerous.


Every hypocrite goes about pretending and claiming to be a well-meaning person.  A religious person who teaches a faith that isn't true is not a well-meaning person no matter how much of a do-gooder they are.  You are only well-meaning if you do the wrong thing while genuinely meaning to help others and don't have the chance to know any better.  Religionists can and should know better.


"Hate the sin and love the sinner" is a theory. Instead of asking, "I wonder can a sinful person like myself really love other sinners and hate their sins?" and getting mental health experts and psychologists to test and find the answer, the Church just gives us the theory. If the answer is yes nobody seems to worry about how correct it is. It could be that if we love the sinner and hate the sin we might be only able to keep the rule 5% of the time. From that it would follow that the Church is encouraging hatred when it condemns sin. The Church has no right to teach us the doctrine simply because it is declaring its guess to be a psychological fact. It is not guesses that ground us in truth but evidence and testing. The motive is just to hide hatred rather than to teach truth.


Suppose the power of choice exists and you are given a choice between being tortured to death and dying your hair green. You chose to dye your hair green. You chose it freely. You were forced into making the choice but it was still a choice because you could have chosen to be tortured to death. Its a lie to say you had no choice. The Catholic teachings that we are born in original sin and are obligated to obey the pope by baptism into the Church and to become saints who have a life of misery and who will go to Hell forever if we die in unrepented serious sin say something about the believer. And it is this.


The believer wants these horrible teachings to be true deep down even if he feels revulsion for them. (Doing what you find abhorrent because its evil does not make you a better person but a terrible one!) The atheist does not acquiesce to evil to that degree. Miracles in Christianity no matter what laudable purpose they seem to have encourage these evil ideas. How can somebody with evil doctrine expect us to believe them that deep down they do not hate sinners? In fact the holier they will live the more hatred will simmer away in their heart of disguises.



If you hate the sin you must hate the sinner for the sinner freely commits the sin.


If a person hated your kindness you would know that is only another way of saying they hate you. So you cannot pretend that somebody who hates your evil traits does not hate you.


Sin is a quality a person has and the sinner IS her or his qualities. Thus to hate the sinner is to hate what he or she is as a person.


Sin cannot be treated separately from the sinner for it reveals the sinner, it reveals what kind of person the sinner is. Now if you separate the sin from the person like that you are not loving the person for you are treating the person as if the person never sinned. You are not loving the real person but the person as you want to see them.


Also blinding yourself to somebody's evil character is hardly loving that person when sin is regarded as an enemy.


They say that God makes loving the sinner possible by some sort of miracle but that would be God doing the impossible – doing something contradictory.


No other miracle would have any value as evidence for his power if he can do that one for his power would make no sense. Whatever miracles prove it is not God.


When you become a sinner, being a sinner becomes the core of your sense of self. When somebody says they are gay the Christians will argue that the being gay is not him, his gayness is merely one of the things that define him as a person. So its not his core. The Christians say they can love him for he is more than just gay. But they are saying, "If you are gay we would hate you if being gay could really be your core, your whole nature and your whole identity." Their love for him is conditional and fake.


Suppose it is true they can love sinners who are not to be identified with their sins or seen as more than just sinners. They hate the part of the man that is gay - so they partly hate him.


He did not make himself gay. If being gay defines him partly or fully, then how much more does something you make yourself to be define you?


To say nurses are bad is to say the people who are nurses are bad. Love the sinner and hate the sin is as silly as love the nurse and hate the woman who is the nurse. The teaching that we must love the sinner and hate the sin because we are sinners ourselves suggests that hating the sinner is good but only if you are not a sinner! It involves wishing you were in a position to be able to hate the sinner!


People say that a person is distinct from their acts so you can value the person and not the acts if they are bad acts. But Christianity says we are sinners not because we sin but we sin because we are sinners. In other words, we are sinners by nature. Thus Christians condemn the sinner with the sin. LGBT people are right to argue that Christians hate them when they say they hate their sexual “sins”.


If free will is misused, then is it still free will? Is the idea of misused freedom a con? An error must take place before you can misuse your free will. An an error necessarily removes freedom even if it makes you feel free. Thus to hate the sin refuses to admit that the sinners are mistaken rather than deliberately evil! It implies you hate them as well.


Christians are not telling the truth that they hate the sins of the sinner not the sinner. If they love the sinner they still paradoxically hate the sinner for they love his nature as a being that harms and demeans himself by sin!



If you hate the sin you are inflicting pain on yourself because of somebody else’s sin and claiming that you love the person. That undermines self-love.


Hating sin means disliking it and wanting to hurt it. You can’t want to hurt something that is not even a thing. Its not a person or an object. You are damaging yourself by hating and you are intending evil. You can’t want to hurt a sin.


It seems to many that if you really believe in hating sin, you should look at your own sins more than the sins of others (Matthew 7:5; Luke 6:42). Indeed, to say you should give this degree of attention to your sins implies you should detest them and hate them. In other words, you are hating yourself.


To hate your sin and wish evil on it is to wish evil on you and hate you. That's good practice for hating other people!


Love the sinner and hate the sin is a contradiction. To hate your own sins even if you never think about the sins of others will make you unable to love yourself and so others will suffer because of that. You are trained in hate and will find it impossible not to hate them.


The person who hates his own sins and pays little attention to those of others is only going to produce personality defects and anger that will be taken out on other people.


He is setting an example for others. He hopes to influence them to do the same. In other words, he wants to see them afflicted with the same torment as he endures.



To oppose the sin is to oppose the sinner. Just because you don’t oppose the sinner in everything doesn’t entitle you to claim that you simply oppose the sin only.


To wish punishment on others is not good for you if you go beyond the limit you can bear. For your own sake, do not hate all the sins of others. Avoid hating them. Do it for your own sake and not theirs.



Hating the sin of your enemy means that you may as well hate your enemy. The stress and suffering your hatred will inflict on you will be very great. You are unlikely to be able to hate everybody. You would be better off hating some people than hating sin. Hating five people is better than hating all the sin you see for then you will soon be consumed for you will see little else but sin!


Hate does not really matter. Its an emotion. Controlling it matters. Believers say it is not a sin to hate if you really can’t do anything about it. Believers claim that it is better to be destroyed than to sin. That is worse than hate. That means that if the circumstances suited, they would destroy you. Choosing to hurt somebody without feeling any hatred makes you worse not better. It means you did it without the influence of a feeling. Feelings happen to you. You don’t control them. They control you. When you feel enraged and you calm down it is because the feeling of calmness came in and it comes by itself regardless of whether you want it or not.


To do foul things makes you a foul person. To say you hate the sin is simply another way of saying you hate the sinner.


Believers sometimes say they do not judge sinners but love them. Not judging makes no difference - you still judge the act and you still dictate consequences for the person.


If you insult me, I let myself be hurt by it. You never insulted me or hurt me. I did that to myself. If I condemn what you did, then I condemn you. I am certainly trying to hate you if I don’t actually hate you.


People make a distinction between disliking somebody or hating them. Dislike is hate for like hate it wants to hurt for no good reason. It may be hate to a lesser intensity than what we call hate but it is still hate. It means you are refusing to give yourself to another.


Suppose somebody is being told some very unwelcome truths about their behaviour. The critic may say, "I am not saying this to be critical but to help you." This is another con like love sinner and hate sin. The motive does not change the fact that it is criticism.


"I love my son but hate what he has become" is admitting to hating him though believers say it is not.


The pope says he forgives the woman who attacked him. Does that mean he hated her and wished her evil before he did that? It must!


Hate sin means to hate somebody’s choice. Is it hating the abuse of freedom or is it hating the freedom to sin? Certainly if you could force a person to be good and not sin you would force.


Suppose you really can love the sinner and hate the sin. You can stone somebody to death believing that it is not personal or about hurting the person but eradicating the sin and euthanizing them.


Thomas beats Johnnie to a pulp for the hell of it. If Johnny is a consistent believer in Christianity, he will have to say, “Thomas never hurt me. Thomas is a wonderful perfect person. It was his sin that hurt me.“ To say you love the sinner and hate the sin is only another way of saying that.


The Church calls you a sinner meaning you are not considered separate from your sin. So love the sinner and hate the sin is contradictory and impossible.


The adage to love sinner and hate sin is incitement to violence in the sense that if you hate the sin you would torment the sinner to make him change if that approach would work.

Secularists are sometimes fooled by the boast of religion that it hates the sin and loves the person responsible for the sin. Why hate sin or evil? There is no need to! The hate is like torturing yourself over evil. It is like punishing yourself for something you haven’t done! The unnecessary hatred of sin is really a thinly disguised hatred for the sinner. Incitement to hatred legislators need to be aware of this. They must not let religionists use tough love as an excuse for their rantings against sin and efforts to stop it. An enemy could say they call you names and treat you badly out of love and call it tough love.

To say you love sinners for God loves them implies that they are hateful but if it were not for God you would let yourself detest them to the uttermost.
You mean to do good when you do wrong. Therefore for anybody to hate your sin is to hate you. To tell anybody, “I hate the way you behave”, is really saying, “There is more to you than what you do and it is you I hate. I hate you as a badly behaving person.”



The Church says that there is no real love unless you live and breathe and practice the law of loving the sinner and hating the sin. So when somebody admits to sinning and you smile or don’t care that is a sin. If you do not protest when your gay son brings the boyfriend around for a sleepover you do not truly love your son. The more one fears you sinning and detests your sins the more they love you! We should be delighted then when people judge us and say our sins are rotten and we need to change urgently. The fact that we would never be happy about that proves that we know that hating the sin is hating the sinner as well.


The Catholic faith ostensibly forbids you to hate your enemy. Hate does not necessarily have to result in acts of violence or cruelty. The Church says that if you feel awful hatred for somebody that you cannot help then you must not let it make you sin against them and it is not a sin in itself for it is not your fault. Does this mean the Church approves of hatred when it afflicts you and when you don’t want to hate?


It doesn't but it as good as! It says it is not a sin.

You could not be expected to feel anything other than hatred for people and demons who you believe are putting your loved ones in danger of Hell.

Catholics who are gay feel that they will be hated by their devout parents should they let their gay nature be known. It is religion that leads to this more than anything.

It is safe to say that Catholicism incites to hatred. There is much evidence that this is so.


In practice, the Church leads to a lot of it.



Believers in love the sinner and hate the sin are taking a position of self-proclaimed moral superiority. They are willing to hurt others and look down on them to make themselves feel superior. They point to Jesus who did not tell the adulteress, “Go and if you believe adultery is right though I believe its wrong then you can commit it." But, “Go and sin no more.”



Judging means perceiving a person as deserving the suffering of punishment and condemnation.


Do you love the sinner and hate the sin when you detest and oppose the fact that your son is taking drugs. No. Its not the same thing. You hate the danger that could befall your son. That is love. But to bring moral judgment into it means you hate him as well.


If you judge him a sinner then to hate and oppose the sin is to hate him as well as the sin.


Judging is unavoidable. If sex outside marriage is wrong, then even people with good intentions who engage in it are bad. They might not mean to be but they are.


Christians judge everybody by saying that everybody is a sinner.


Does love the sinner hate the sin really just mean “Condemn the sin but forgive the sinner?” It would have to in order to make any sense. But if you condemn the sin you have to condemn the sinner. Otherwise if you are pretending the sinner and the sin have nothing to do with one another. And if that is the case, how can you forgive a sinner if they have had nothing to do with their sin? Forgiving must mean you condemn and therefore hate the sinner but are refusing to indulge that hate. So the hate is still there.


Imputing guilt or an evil disposition or evil activity to someone is not necessarily judging them. For example, if a band of thieves judge that x may make a good thief for them they would not concern him for becoming one. Indeed they will regard him as a godsend.


Real judging is linked to the concepts of punishing and deserving.


If you hate the sins of others, you will blame them for how bad this hate makes you feel. Religion causes trouble. Outright hatred would be better than this sneakiness.


Judging is a form of hate. Punishing and judging go together. Judging is willing pain on someone for having done what you perceive to be wrong. To judge is to try and hate. And it is hate. 


Love the sinner and hate the sin if possible with family members and friends is surely not possible with strangers.


The advice would work if you hate the sin BECAUSE you love the sinner. But empathy and moral outrage tend to work at cross purposes. And not all sins

have significant bad consequences. You can't always hate the sin because you love the sinner.


People who say that we must not judge are hypocrites. If a young man beats up an old man who he says molested him years before people will say the young man behaved badly. In other words, they are saying the old man did not deserve it. This is siding with the pervert against the victim. They say the victim should be punished. They say the victim deserves to be hurt in return for beating up the old man while the old man should get away. This is outrageous hypocrisy. They say it is not for us to judge people - meaning the old man. Then they judge the person who attacked him. The goodness of Christians is really a form of camouflaged evil.


People judge morality on their feelings. This means they hate the sinner when they say they hate the sin. It means we should assume they are idolaters. If I condemn something someone does because I FEEL abhorrence for their action then that is not the same as believing they have done wrong. I am declaring my feelings to be God.


It is really the judging of the person that is the problem. Judging and hating go together. You even judge the good person you hate, "That person is bad in my eyes and I want to see that person suffer". When you see that love the sinner hate the sin is really saying judge the sin not the sinner you see how silly it is. "I judge your bad character but I don't judge you." It is pure contradiction and it is insulting.


The notion that love the sinner and hate the sin is about the sinner's wellbeing is a blatant lie.