The word “antithesis” is a noun meaning a person or thing that is the direct opposite of someone or something else. The prefix “anti” is used as part of an adjective to describe something in a negative light, and it seems to be used more and more to describe (or attack) people rather than things.
This article about Chick-fil-A no longer donating to certain charities boasts a headline about organizations that are “anti-LGBTQ”. If you read the article, you’ll find the reason these organization are pigeonholed as “anti-LGBTQ” is because they hold certain beliefs such as, “neither heterosexual sex outside of marriage nor any homosexual act constitute an alternative lifestyle acceptable to God” and a certain belief that basically everyone held until about 2 seconds ago…“marriage is exclusively a union between one man and one woman”.
Reflex biasness in the media is reaching the point of invincible blindness. To illustrate something like this, it’s often helpful to think of “opposites”. For example, if we need to better understand the color white, it helps to study the color black. If Chick-fil-A did the opposite…started donating to LGBTQ organizations; would the CNN headline then read “Chick-fil-A begins donating to anti-Christian organizations”? I think not.
We know how these things go. If you happen to believe that every human life should be protected under the law, you are anti-choice. If you are white and you criticize an African American organization, you are anti-black. I even recently ran across this article that calls Donald Trump the anti-President. By the way, this can happen on both sides of the political aisle. If someone supports a piece of gun legislation, they just might be called anti-gun.
This will probably get worse before it gets better because it’s such an easy and mindless way to dismiss entire swaths of people. Perhaps in the near future, if you disparage any aspect of social justice, you will be anti-justice. Question any aspect of climate change and you could be anti-Earth or anti-environment. If some poor fool thinks that human rights trump animal rights, will he/she be called anti-animal or something to that effect?
This is scary stuff once God is rejected by a society or group of people. Consider some sound and godless logic on physician-assisted suicide. Why limit euthanasia to only desperate pain? The very old, very sick and severely physically or mentally handicapped should all be considered for mandatory euthanization once the quality of life has been properly assessed by health professionals. Again, we must be mindful of the “common good” and do the “right thing” no matter how difficult it may seem. Why allow these poor people to suffer for no good reason…even if they choose to suffer. Those in favor will be called progressively “pro-health”. Those opposed will be said to have an “anti-health” agenda.
Perhaps you’ve heard the term “own the language”? It’s the same as saying “control the thought”.
“But if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought.”
― George Orwell, 1984