If you grew up in fundamentalist or evangelical Christianity, you probably heard “love everyone” and “love the sinner, hate the sin” and possibly “love covers a multitude of sins.”

As an ex-Christian, I want to talk about this Christian idea of "loving everyone."

This emphasis on “loving everyone” is especially ironic because fundies and evangelicals are known for their discriminatory practices, judgmental attitudes, and fierce advocacy of conservative laws and policies on a national/global level that actively harm marginalized folks.

I am an ex-evangelical & an ex-Christian. Today, I am Pagan but I identify less with the theistic aspects of Paganism. I value connectivity and sustainability and equity. And, I actually don’t think we have to love everyone. You don’t have to “love everyone” to want equity.

I don’t think I love everyone. I still want everyone to be fed, housed, have access to resources and education and to be provided no-cost health care. Even the people I don’t like — I still want them to have all these things.

I also want to see the police abolished and prisons abolished. I don’t love everyone and I still don’t think anyone should go to prison. Even my abusers and my assaulters, I would’ve loved to see some kind of consequence but I know incarceration is *not* the answer.

That doesn’t make me a good person. I think there’s some base level of human decency that is just “everyone should have all basic needs met in full and should have good quality of life regardless of social-economic status.”

There’s no love required to want that. There’s no love required to advocate for it or vote for the policies that can start shifting this way. There's no love required to vote to tax the rich more to achieve that.

Love is cool and fun and I think loving things and people makes life better. I also think it’s okay to selectively give your love. You can love your chosen family, friends, whoever else you want to. But, you don’t have to freely bestow your love upon everyone.

And, not “loving everyone” doesn’t mean you’re not rooting for them, or wanting the best for them. It certainly doesn't mean you don't want them to have quality of life/needs met. You don't need to love someone to root for them to succeed!

Christians hide behind “loving everyone” and we all know that they don’t. It’s a weird kind of deflection. Maybe they even really believe they do love everyone.

But, proselytizing people isn’t love. It’s colonialism. Denying people access to resources isn’t love. It’s cruelty. Hating their sin isn’t love. It’s discrimination.

All in all, I think “loving everyone” cheapens love. Maybe this is why so many Christian marriages are absolute garbage.

Many of us raised by Christian parents had bad experiences in our childhoods/youths (our autonomy violated, no boundaries, hyper critical rule and fear-based childhoods, repressed desires, lots of anxiety). Maybe because they don’t know how to love when it counts?

Ultimately, human decency (wanting everyone to have needs met + quality of life) isn’t synonymous with loving everyone. Wanting equity for all isn’t synonymous with loving everyone.

The extra ironic part is that Christians usually don’t even want those things.... Further proving my point that loving everyone is not synonymous with wanting folks to have their needs met.

It’s okay to give your love purposefully and even selectively. It’s a gift.

You get to choose who you want to give your love to! You can do so however you please. But, you don't have to "love everyone." And, if you don't love everyone, you're not a bad person. You can even advocate for equity and to see all needs met without "love."