Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
The Opposite of Love
The Opposite of Love
Nov 30, 2025 6:45 PM
mon lesson that many of us were taught in grammar school was what defined an ‘opposite.’ As children we learn that hot and cold are antonyms; as are bad and good, living and dead, love and hate. One statement that I recently heard challenged a childhood preconception of mine. It declared that the opposite of love is not hate, but indifference.

If we think about what indifference is, we soon see that it is in stark opposition to love. To be neither hot nor cold toward a person in need is quite a horrific thing. It involves a lackadaisical attitude where we fail to see human beings as individual persons made in the image and likeness of God. If I have a neighbor down the street and do not care if his family is treated unjustly I am acting in an egocentric way. I am being indifferent and not – loving my neighbor as myself.

This idea troubled me and I began to wonder what ways I was acting indifferently toward others. My first thoughts were about homeless men and women whom I had ignored on the street. This notion shifted once again as I began to think not about whom I had ignored, but the reason behind why I had ignored them. I found two reasons.

The first had to do with my resources. I am a recent graduate of James Madison University in Harrisonburg, Virginia and an intern at the Acton Institute who has more debt than money to his name. Since I am not able to fully provide for myself I can only offer a bit of pocket money or volunteer from time to time. Because my resources are limited, my ability to help is limited.

The second reason, I am ashamed to say, is that I do not always take beggars at their word. I find that I am more likely to believe a man who is asking for gas money than a man who is looking to buy food. This may seem judgmental at first, however I do find that there is a logical reason behind my rationale.

On a federal level, our government provides food stamps, housing benefits, medical care, and material welfare that the marginalized and impoverished of society can easily obtain. On a local level many towns and counties have various outreach programs in place. These programs are also funded by taxes, but are more personal than federal aid. On a private level: churches, consignment shops, soup kitchens, food banks, and personal charity can help those in need. The fact that aid to the poor simply exists on a large scale is the answer to my original question. I am more likely to believe a man who is asking me for gas money because there is no such thing as a gas relief program.

When seeing a man asking for food money I may say to myself, “Why should I or anyone bother to help a man on the street who is hungry? He can always go get food stamps, or go to a soup kitchen; a church will take him in.”

It is so easy for me to ignore this man because of the relief programs that are in place. Lo and behold I find myself not engaging in some Samaritan’s dilemma by giving a dollar or two; I simply walk away from him. I am planting a seed of indifference.

I am not advocating for the abolition of government safety nets or private charity. However, the simple fact remains that if less assistance were available I would also be more likely to believe the hungry man. I would also be less likely to judge him and fall into stereotypes which cause me to question his sobriety, mental state, or work ethic. It is only natural that the further I am away from a particular problem, the more I will likely begin to view it as someone else’s problem instead of my own.

We can cultivate a society of indifference by the kinds of laws and relief programs we have in place. The more dependent we e on the government or the assistance of others, the less we are able to control the es of our own lives. When we petition for relief, rather than provide for each other, we e self-centered and not self-reliant. If we are not free to make a difference, charity es impossible.

If we want to avoid indifference we need to cultivate a culture of love. To love someone can mean a variety of things. However, there is a definition that I heard recently which suits. Love, simply put, is ‘to will someone the best’. When looking at how safety nets and charity are done, prudence should be used to determine the best way of helping others. We should avoid throwing more money at our problems and further delaying solutions. A moral decision is one that involves thinking with your mind as well as feeling with your heart.

A simple point about love is that you cannot separate it from a voluntary choice. Legal institutions such as the government, non-profits, and welfare programs are not able to love others. It is people who are capable of love. It is people who are made in God’s likeness that can passion.

Should we continue to deprive ourselves of the opportunity to voluntarily engage in charity, we will inevitably fall into a culture of indifference. Free society and prudent charity provide the framework for love and prosperity.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
New ‘Religion & Liberty’ focuses on the student loan crisis
The newest issue ofReligion & Libertyhas been uploaded. You can view it here. This issue ofReligion & Libertyfocuses on higher education in all its fulness. Two statistics throw the college tuition crisis into stark relief: Since 1978 – the year the federal government offered subsidized loans to all students – the cost of college tuition has risen by 1,375 percent. And another 1,400 students default on those loans every day. The cover story by Anne Rathbone Bradley unravels the crisis...
Samuel Gregg on ‘The specter of scientism’
In this week’s Acton Commentary, Acton Research Director Samuel Gregg looks at how “scientism” treats the scientific method as the only way of knowing anything and everything. Without dismissing the real achievements of modern science, he notes that “one side-effect of these triumphs was that some began treating the empirical sciences as the only form of true reason and the primary way to discern true knowledge … ” Notwithstanding these serious flaws with scientism, its acceptance has two effects on...
Acton Line podcast: Why the ‘1619 Project’ is a lie; Yes, we’ve tried ‘real socialism’
In August, the New York Times launched the ‘1619 Project,’ an initiative that includes school curriculum, videos, and a podcast, which aims to “reframe” the history of America’s founding around slavery. The Times claims that since the year 1619, “[n]o aspect of the country that would be formed here has been untouched by the years of slavery that followed.” So what is the Times trying to plish with the ‘1619 Project’? Ismael Hernandez, founder and director of the Freedom &...
Every politician is Andrew Yang
Richard Nixon supposedly once said, “We’re all Keynesians now,” referring to the new accepted regime of monetary policy. Today, we have far bigger problems than our Keynesian Federal Reserve. Any present-day politician could just as well say, “We’re all Andrew Yang now.” Andrew Yang, for those who don’t know, is running for the Democratic nomination for president. He’s an eccentric businessman whose signature policy proposal is that he wants to give you cold hard cash. Really. While many, including me,...
Alejandro Chafuen in Forbes: The uncertainties of the Brexit debate
Acton’s own Alejandro Chafuen recently returned from a visit to England, and today in Forbes he offers a few of his impressions and analyses of the contentious Brexit process. The political machinations of the current situation are seemingly endless, but its ramifications are more than just political. As Chafuen points out, for instance, the ongoing saga brings uncertainty for anyone who does business in the UK. “We have many issues that go to a referendum in Switzerland. But after the...
Rev. Ben Johnson at Natl Catholic Register: Praying to the true ‘King of Israel’
The week after Donald Trump tweeted a message proclaiming himself the ing of God,” I decided to say a prayer to the “King of Israel” (although quietly, since my bishop encouraged me to pray so softly that no parishioner would hear me). I am assured that literally thousands of priests in this country have joined me in standing before our altars and whispering an identical prayer, using the same moniker. This is not a confession of idolatry nor an insider’s...
5 facts about the U.S. Constitution
Today is Constitution Day, which is observed every year to remember the Founding Fathers signingthe Constitution on September 17, 1787. Here are five facts you need to know about the Constitution: 1. Neither Thomas Jefferson nor John Adams signed the Constitution, nor attended the Constitutional Convention. Adams served as our representative to Great Britain, and Jefferson represented U.S. interests in France. Both died on July 4, 1826. 2. promisedid e about because the Founding Fathers considered African-Americans “three-fifths of a...
The problem with intellectuals
I am in the curious position of being a blogger who distrusts opinions. The late yoga master B.K.S. Iyengar put it best when he wrote, “An opinion is yesterday’s right or wrong knowledge warmed up and re-served for today’s situation.” Too often opinion is divorced from both personal experience and rigorous thought. F.A. Hayek’s essay “The Intellectuals and Socialism” is an attempt at defining the nature and function of professional opinion-havers. His description of them as, “second hand dealers in...
Fact check: Did the wealth tax increase the number of millionaires?
“If you want less of something, tax it,” the old adage goes. If that is the case, why is a prominent European newspaper reporting that the number of millionaires increased after one nation introduced a wealth tax? “Number of super-rich in Spain grows 74% since reintroduction of wealth tax,” a headline in Spain’sEl Paisreportedrecently. Here are the facts: Background Spain introduced a wealth tax (Patrimonio) in 1977 as a “temporary” measure. In 1991, lawmakers admitted the 14-year-old tax would be...
Only an EU ‘empire’ can secure liberty: EU leader
Is a European-wide patible with liberty? A prominent EU leader mended transforming the European Union into an “empire” at a UK political party conference this weekend, to sustained applause. “The world order of tomorrow … is a world order based on empires,” said Guy Verhofstadt, a Member of European Parliament (MEP) and the EU’s chief negotiator on Brexit. He is also leader of the EU’s Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe faction. ments came at the party conference of...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2025 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved