""Hate the sin, love the sinner" is a concept even devout Christians often find challenging. But what if the sin is hate, the sinner is a hater, and your whole redemption-free religion is based on the hatred of hate? What if we are all sinners in the hands of an angry podcaster? This is the deep theological discourse that can be provoked only by the author and essayist Ta-Nehisi Coates, who made a joyless noise unto the Lord in the direction of the slain conservative political activist Charlie Kirk."
""I think Charlie Kirk was a hatemonger," Coates told New York Times columnist Ezra Klein. "I take no joy in the killing of anyone no matter what they said. But if you ask me what the truth of his life was I would have to tell you it's hate." Per the golden rule of punditry, what Coates did unto Kirk was done unto him. The columnist Karol Markowicz replied that Coates was a hatemonger himself."
Ta-Nehisi Coates labeled Charlie Kirk a hatemonger while insisting he felt no joy at the killing but viewed hate as the defining truth of Kirk's life. Critics quickly returned the accusation, calling Coates a hatemonger and citing his prior inquiry into whether he hates white people. A moral paradox emerges in which progressive morality can justify hating those who hate, collapsing the distinction between condemning hate and hating the hater. The argument links this stance to punditry and reciprocal media attacks. An aside defends NYPD Blue as a precursor to later prestige television dramas.
Read at The American Conservative
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]