Biblical Justice, Leadership Development
Political Dehumanization as a Strategy of Power: A Theological and Pastoral Reading
February 13, 2026
7 comments
790 views
Please note: Due to our legal status as a nonprofit in both Canada and the US, we are unable to support discussion of current political parties / politicians, and all comments that refer to specific current politicians / political parties will be removed.
For decades, Reformed pastors have warned that ideas do not emerge in a vacuum. Behind political discourse lie worldviews that, when detached from biblical truth, produce practices that are profoundly anti-Christian. One of the most persistent patterns of the last century has been the animalization of political opponents as a tool for control, exclusion, and ultimately the justification of violence.
Calling an opponent an "animal" is not an innocent metaphor. It is a moral operation. Once a person is stripped of their humanity, any ethical obligation toward them is weakened. Animals are not debated with; they are removed, contained, or exterminated. This logic has been repeated with striking consistency by different ideological regimes.
Documented historical examples:
These examples are neither accidental nor confined to a single ideology. They express the same spiritual logic: denying God-given dignity in order to claim absolute power over another's life.
Scripture is clear from the beginning. "So God created mankind in his own image; in the image of God he created them" Genesis 1:27.
Human dignity does not come from the State, the party, or social usefulness. It comes from the Creator. Therefore, any narrative that reduces a human being to a beast, a pest, or an object is not neutral. It is a rebellion against the created order.
Animalization is not new. The language of darkness has always sought to degrade the bearer of the divine image. In Romans 1, Paul describes how the rejection of God leads to the distortion of truth and the darkening of the mind. When God is displaced, humanity ceases to see itself as creature and begins to see itself as resource, obstacle, or biological enemy.
As Reformed pastors, we cannot normalize this language, regardless of which political side uses it. Our loyalty is not tribal or ideological; it is theological. Wherever the image of God is degraded, the Church must raise a clear, sober, and firm voice.
This is not political naivety but doctrinal faithfulness. We can rigorously confront ideas, systems, and policies. What we cannot do is accept a narrative that denies the humanity of our neighbor, because in doing so we erode the very foundation on which Christian ethics stand.
Every time a culture begins to call people animals, history teaches us that violence is already on the way. Language does not merely describe reality; it prepares it. In the face of this recurring trend, the Church is called to reaffirm a non-negotiable truth: we are the image of God. That image is not lost because someone thinks differently, votes differently, or dissents from power.
Where darkness animalizes, the Gospel humanizes. Where power degrades, Christ restores. This remains our mission.
In Him,
Christian Sebastia
Biblical Justice, Leadership Development
Biblical Justice, Hospitality
Biblical Justice, Church Renewal
Connect to The Network and add your own question, blog, resource, or job.
Add Your Post
Comments
Please note: Due to our legal status as a nonprofit in both Canada and the US, we are unable to support discussion of current political parties / politicians, and all comments that refer to specific current politicians / political parties will be removed.
Christian, thank you for sharing this timely reminder of our shared human heritage in the image of God. May it be a reminder for us all that each and every human we meet, regardless of whether or not we agree with what they say or do, carries the breath of our Creator.
Amen. Recognizing the image of God in every person is precisely what guards our speech and keeps disagreement from becoming dehumanization. Even Jesus used animals as metaphors. The difference, once again, is context and intent. Some images are meant to warn and restore, others to degrade and erase dignity.
Christian,
Once again, your pastoral heart and wisdom are evident. Thank you for a poignant and timely call to eschew all ideological allegiances that place us in opposition to our ultimate allegiance. There is no love in degrading others. Our current climate contains far too much degradation and not nearly enough statesmanlike and neighborly love and respect.
Thanks Eric, When our ultimate allegiance is clear, love and respect for neighbor stop being optional virtues and become necessary fruit.
I will point out that our Savior called false teachers a "brood of vipers." And Paul refered to people teaching salvation by works as "dogs."
So merely comparing someone to an animal in a negative way is not wrong, in and of itself. It is when such usage is tied to a systematic campaign and effort to dehumanize a certain group of people that it crosses the line, especially when it is done to justify lawless violence against those people.
For example, referring to unborn babies as a "clump of cells." Or referring to law enforcement as "pigs" or "bacon." In both of those cases, the people that are dehumanizing their fellow human beings are doing so to justify violence against them.
thank you Christian for both reminding us all persons are image bearers of God and educating us further on this. I pray our churches will be beacons of light in the world around us that reflects that truth in all our actions.
Let's Discuss
We love your comments! Thank you for helping us uphold the Community Guidelines to make this an encouraging and respectful community for everyone.