I had reason this past week to give deeper reflection to the question of whether a nation is served by criminalizing “hate speech.” Last week I blurted out a FB post that got a lot more attention than I’d intended. I was trying to shed light on the recent tendency to drum up political support among churches through fearmongering. Some interpreted my post as supporting Bill C-9, but I’m not actually a fan of curing hate by means of enforcement, of power. I agree with Thomas Merton, the Trappist monk among the wiser voices of the 20th century, who believed that the only cure for hatred is for us to trust deeply that we ourselves are loved. This is why I think it’s crucial for us all to learn “radical self-acceptance.”Â
I agree with Merton because I think he was onto something when he suggested: “Hatred is the sign and the expression of loneliness, of unworthiness, of insufficiency. And insofar as each of us is lonely, is unworthy, each one hates himself.” Some are conscious of this self-hatred and punish themselves in various ways – in vain. Others can’t face it and instead project that hatred onto others, as if by joining a shared hatred they come to belong to something meaningful; as if they could find some bizarre worthiness in hating what they believe is less worthy even than themselves.
I think a deep frustration is often a stepping stone in linking a subconscious self-hatred with the tendency to project onto others. Our attempts to make things better, to exert the control we think is necessary to be ok, is blocked. “We could make things ok if only others didn’t get in the way!” So, my own lack of being OK becomes hatred toward those who are “in the way.” I’ve been trying to let my own frustration become my reminder to accept others as they are to keep me away from the path of projection and hatred.
But tragically, according to Merton, if we continue to project our hatred on others, it sometimes “succeeds” by erasing the felt sense of loneliness and unworthiness, especially when the hate “feels the support of a justifying God.” This dangerous form of hatred actually “takes joy in hating.” In other words, the worst thing we could do is offer a “religious exemption” for hatred. Hatred backed up by an imagined divine wrath wreaks havoc and causes real harm and violence, and it’s easy to find a sacred text to support it and hide behind.
Different faiths have taken different pathways in growing beyond this hatred that still remains embedded in some ancient texts. In Christianity, the turn away was declared boldly when Jesus picked up the thread from the Hebrew prophets and called his followers to mercy rather than judgement. Christians sometimes forget this crucial shift that is meant to help us leave hate behind – even though our faith makes no sense at all without it.
So, yes, I support eliminating a “religious exemption” from hate laws; that’s the last thing we need. Religiously justified hatred is the most dangerous kind. But criminalization – finding the answer in state enforcement – should be a last resort since we know that it has no power to cure anyone of hate. Over-zealous labelling of hate in others just leads to self-righteous protestation and walls of self-defence. Let the laws rather be reserved for restraining the most blatantly harmful expressions of hatred, truly intended to incite violence and blatant discrimination. I hope that is the intent of Bill C-9, but I don’t know enough to be confident.
I wish there were a more instant alternative, but I think we’re left with the long, slow work of building up communities in which love is practiced and extended toward all, even toward the so-called “haters,” and even if we feel falsely accused ourselves. We have a lot of work to do. The only religion I’m interested is one that gives me some strength and community support to be a part of this long, slow work.
 (This and all Merton quotes from New Seeds of Contemplation)