Chip Gaines tells us not to judge — but we won’t pretend any more
Chip and Joanna Gaines are in hot water — not with the left, but with the same Christian conservative audience that made them household names. Why? Because their new reality show features a gay couple with two “adopted” children — portrayed in the warm, country-home aesthetic that defines the Gaines brand. They pronounce that this is family time well spent.
When backlash inevitably began, Chip Gaines took to social media to cool things down. His message varied from urging critics to “listen” and “learn” to censuring fellow Christians for “judg[ing] 1st, understand later/never,” lamenting how Christians are simply purveyors of “hate and vitriol.” Ultimately, he finally settled on being a victim.
Chip Gaines laments on social media that Christians are quick to judge and slow to listen — then immediately judges them as mean-spirited.
While the full social media drama is still unfolding, one thing Gaines notably did not say was, “I share your view on marriage and agree that normalizing a gay couple as a moral and healthy family structure is a problem." Instead, he criticized Christians for being “hateful,” boiling the Christian life down to one oversimplified command: “Don’t judge.”
Ah yes, that verse — the favorite verse of every smug libertine who treats quoting Matthew 7:1 as a theological mic drop.
“Don’t judge,” they proclaim, believing they’ve just checkmated their Christian sparring partner. But whenever someone pulls that verse out of his back pocket, it’s rarely after a rigorous exegesis. Usually, he's just dodging a moral reckoning.
Framing is never neutral
The issue here isn’t simply the presence of a gay couple on a TV show. It's the framing — a term woke professors love, so let’s indulge them.
If it truly isn't a big deal, Chip, then why intentionally feature a gay couple at all? Reality TV isn't a livestream of raw America; it’s carefully scripted and edited to send a particular message. In this case, the message isn’t neutral. It deliberately normalizes a version of family life where two men can “have” children and live as if their union mirrors traditional marriage.
But it doesn’t. And it can’t.
The liberal academics at a university like Baylor — which, not coincidentally, recently passed on a major LGBTQ+ grant after it got exposed in the press — will ask, “What’s wrong with visibility? We can’t pretend gay couples don’t exist.” But no one is pretending that. The real question is whether we must affirm, celebrate, and gloss over the serious consequences of a lifestyle in the name of diversity and inclusion.
LGBTQ advocates’ double standard
At the heart of the matter is the glaring contradiction in the LGBTQ worldview: the idea that nothing in nature is normative. LGBTQ advocates argue explicitly that just because every human is born from a male-female union doesn't mean society must follow this model. Yet in the next breath, they assert that their own sexual attractions are natural and thus morally compelling.
So nature is normative — when it suits their desires. But when nature reveals the fundamental design of human reproduction and family structure — one man, one woman, and children from that union — they claim it’s irrelevant..
You can’t have it both ways. Either nature reveals something about how we ought to live, or it doesn’t. This inconsistency shows that the LGBTQ worldview isn't a coherent moral philosophy. It boils down to the hedonistic mantra: “Do what thou wilt.”
The inner libertarian in all of us may be tempted to say, “Do what you want. It’s your life. You’ll live with the consequences.” But the moment you demand that society join your moral hallucination — to smile, applaud, and redefine reality — the stakes change.
And when children become involved, the stakes rise exponentially.
Commodifying children
Consider these children. We’re told they’re “just like any other family.” But are they? Were they adopted as orphans in need of care, or were they purchased, intentionally separated from their biological mother so that two men could simulate parenthood?
That’s what is being asked of us — not just acceptance of two men in love, but approval of a system where human beings become commodities, accessories for adults who want to “play family.” This moral sleight of hand rebrands child commodification as compassionate parenting. Ironically, the old-timely leftist professor would easily get three protests and a sit-in scheduled over this commercialization of human trafficking.
The kicker is that we can diagnose the problem without even cracking open a Bible. We don’t need to quote Romans 1 or Genesis 2 (though we should) to recognize that something is deeply wrong when society demands that we pretend children can have two dads and no mom, that what these men do to each other’s bodies is love, and that this is equal to God’s intended design.
Judgment is unavoidable
Christians voicing concern are told, “Don’t judge.” But judgment is unavoidable. The moment you choose which stories to tell, which couples to feature, and how to portray them, you’re making a judgment.
The real question is: Whose judgment are you endorsing?
Chip Gaines laments on social media that Christians are quick to judge and slow to listen — then immediately judges them as mean-spirited. But Jesus never said, “Don’t judge, period.” He instructed, “Judge rightly.” That requires discernment, courage, and a moral compass rooted in something deeper than social media applause.
Regardless of how this particular show unfolds, American Christians don't have to indulge another person's immorality or rebellion against nature and God. It’s the story of people exchanging the truth of God for a lie — and demanding that everyone else smile while they do it.
We’re not going to smile any more. And we’re certainly not going to pretend.
The left’s latest bid to regain power is a clunky combination of astroturfing and gaslighting.
Photo (left): DON EMMERT/AFP via Getty Images; Photo (right): ANGELA WEISS/AFP via Getty Images
Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images
www.theblaze.com
www.theblaze.com