Can We Trust Kamala to “Fight Hate?”

Written by Ecce Verum

We’re in the final days of the election season now.

Maybe you’ve already voted. Maybe you’re still trying to decide. Regardless of anything I or anyone else writes to sway you one way or another, I pray God gives you the wisdom to honor Him in good conscience with your ballot. Walk before Him in righteousness.

Yet, I do think that He often uses other human voices to help guide us into wisdom, and I hope I’m able to contribute a little truth here and there to that end. So I won’t stop writing. 

To that point, here’s another thought on Kamala Harris, especially if you haven’t cast your ballot yet.

I personally think that the issue of human life is the knock-out punch to the idea of voting for Harris, but that doesn’t mean I don’t have other concerns as well. Kamala’s record on the freedom of speech is concerning, to say the least.

Let’s flash back five years to May of 2019, as the 2020 election was starting to loom in the distance. Kamala gave a forceful speech at a NAACP dinner, a speech which slammed Trump for being hateful and promoted her strategies for fighting hate in America. At one point in the speech, she a minute to address the role of social media—she argued that social media has a responsibility to police the content on their own platforms, and if that doesn’t happen, she will step in:

“If you profit off of hate, if you act as a megaphone for misinformation or cyber warfare, if you don’t police your platforms, we are going to hold you accountable as a community” (see this video at 12:58).

On the surface, this sounds all well and good. No one wants to support hate. No one wants to be duped by wrong facts. We all want our community to protect us, to some extent.

But I’m quite concerned when Kamala makes a statement like this—not so much because of what those words mean, but because of what she means when she says those words. Let’s break it down a little bit.  

“If you profit off of hate…”

Hate is a loaded word. Properly defined, it’s something we all should reject. Yet in politics, almost nothing is properly defined. Now, right before her social media remark, Kamala did indeed list a series of tragic acts of violence that—assuming her facts are right—everyone ought to oppose. However, we all know she intends to stand against more than physical acts of violence.

She wants to oppose hateful statements as well.

Here’s why this is problematic. What you perceive as hateful always boils down to what you yourself love. It boils down to your own values. If you value abortion, then you are more inclined to see pregnancy resource centers—including some of the nicest people on the planet—as “hateful.”

If you value sexual freedom, then you are more inclined to see even genuine and compassionate Bible-believing Christians as “hateful.” Ultimately, “hate” is an emotion, not a statement of objective fact.

The bottom line is that we all have values, and therefore we all view certain things as hateful. I strive every day to value the things that my Lord values, and thus I will view whatever hates Him as hateful. Other people, who have different values, will hate the things I love, and love the things I hate. I once saw a sign that cut right to the chase:

“Truth sounds like hate to those who hate truth.”

It’s all about your values.

Fighting hate sounds all well and good, until we ask the deeper question: “What are Kamala’s values?” Because Kamala’s values do not align with God’s—her website pledges that she’ll support LGBTQ agenda and abortion access—it’s a scary statement when she calls for fighting hate.

“… if you act as a megaphone for misinformation…”

At first glance, this seems a bit more objective than fighting “hate.” We all know “hate” is a word charged with emotion, but “misinformation”—that sounds pretty scientific. When you expose misinformation, doesn’t that mean you research the cold, hard facts and find out whether someone is objectively wrong, regardless of what you prefer?

Oh, that we could live in a world that straightforward! Unfortunately, we don’t.

Anyone who’s lived through COVID knows that “misinformation” is also a loaded term. Except this time, it’s subjectivity masquerading as objectivity. If you really think about it, not only do your values affect what you believe to be “hate,” but your values also affect what you even believe to be true!

People who were predisposed to value the opinion of the elite public health experts were much more likely to label as “misinformation” any information that didn’t fit with the narrative. Your values always affect what you perceive to even be basic “facts.”

So even an appeal to “truth vs. misinformation” doesn’t provide an objective standard apart from your own values. Again, Kamala’s values do not give me confidence that she will even handle facts correctly.

When she was Attorney General of California, Kamala proudly supported and co-sponsored the FACT act, which required pro-life pregnancy centers to provide information about abortion services. As she put it, the law ensured that women

“have the facts they need to make informed decisions about their health and their lives.”

Yikes.

“… we are going to hold you accountable as a community.”

This sounds all well and good, until you realize that Kamala is a politician. A politician who, just a bit earlier in the speech, pledged to double the civil rights division of the U.S. Department of Justice to pursue her goals of fighting for rights.

When Kamala speaks about what “we as a community” are going to do, she really means “what the government is going to do.” Consider everything I’ve said before about how “hate” and “misinformation” really depend on your values. And how Kamala’s values are corrupt.

Now place all that in the hands of the state.

“Corrupt” just got “frightening.”