The conflict in America between the Left and Right, Democrat and Republican, non-Christian and Christian, however one might wish to delineate it, is complicated and defies a simple explanation. But there are elements of that conflict which should be closely examined so as to help those who are genuinely seeking a resolution.

One of the points of this cultural conflict regards compassion, which is or should be a manifestation of love. The Left declares that they care about people, but that conservatives do not. We conservatives disagree, of course. And I would suggest that a little closer scrutiny might help clear up the confusion and clarify which side is truly compassionate.

It is not possible to be certain what other people are thinking. We can only evaluate them by their deeds; and while the Left may have a broader and more sophisticated philosophy of compassion, what we generally witness by their actions appears, in real life, to be the opposite of compassion.

After decades of programs and activities created by the Left, to supposedly address America’s needy, one might get the idea that they consider compassion to be their defining characteristic. However, their compassion is basically manifested in three ways:

1. They give away a lot of money, generally other peoples’. 

2. They believe compassion must be non-judgmental and thus refuse to hold people responsible for their actions, and

3. Their solutions are almost without exception, short-term at best.  

Biden’s opening the southern border is a prime example of this. The millions who entered America illegally over the last few years in the name of compassion, now live in constant fear of being caught and deported!

That is not compassion. It is a nightmare!

And, to top it off, if you question the efficacy of their programs, you are a hater.

Such an analysis of the Left is imperfect of course, but I believe it is generally true.

So, the question is, what is compassion, how do we Christians define it, and whose definition is correct? I cannot speak for all conservatives of course, but I believe that my perspective would be relatively common among those who call themselves conservatives.

First. compassion, being a manifestation of love, is defined accurately by God in the Bible. Any definition that contradicts God’s word is in error. In broad terms, love is described in the Scriptures as sacrificial giving, gentle and forgiving on one hand (I Corinthians 13), but also firm and even painful at times, especially when exercising discipline essential to the recipient’s wellbeing (Hebrews 12:5-7).

Second. From Scripture we understand that genuine compassion prioritizes the long-term best interests of a person, especially concerning his eternal destiny. Paul notes that God commands children to honor their parents “that it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth,” (Ephesians 6:3).

Clearly, this biblical principle assumes decades passing between the action and its consequences. Motives notwithstanding, choices which provide short-term comfort or pleasure, but long-term pain or deadly consequences are not compassionate. Simply put, God favors long life, and death is His and our enemy.

Proverbs chapter 8 represents God as wisdom personified and notes that “all those who hate me (God) love death,” (verse 36).

An honest assessment of America’s current culture must conclude that we, as a species, are uniquely unwise. We glorify and promote a host of things that bring neither health nor happiness, and often great risk and death. Those on the Left somehow rationalize that anyone who confronts dangerous practices and seeks to keep people alive are hateful control freaks!

This is a point of great disagreement between the Left and the Right. Leftists see criticism of a person’s behavior as “judgmental,” while we see it not as judgmental, but as caring enough to intervene.

Third. Compassion is an objective quality and is not determined by what a person feels in the moment. Illegal drugs may provide a momentary sense of pleasure or even well-being but are objectively detrimental or even deadly.

To advocate for such, as many on the left do, is in no way compassionate.

Fourth. Simply throwing money at a problem is not only not inherently compassionate, it is often foolish. While money may be essential in accomplishing one’s objectives and fixing people’s problems, it is the height of absurdity to wrap oneself in a cloak of compassion for simply throwing great sums of money at a problem, especially if it is other people’s money!

The fact is that money is a two-edged sword: For everyone who has been helped with the insertion of capital, there are an unknown number of people who have been hurt or destroyed by the same. The debacle unfolding in Minnesota as we speak underscores the problems inherent in naively believing money is the best or only answer to life’s problems. Money without character and accountability only invites abuse.

Fifth. My earlier point, that Leftists believe compassion does not ask for accountability, is also being manifested in Minnesota. The Left not only failed to hold accountable the people who received billions of tax dollars for their non-existent day care centers, they appear to be actively combatting those who would bring the fraudsters to justice.

A recent tragedy that underscores this point is the death of a highly acclaimed Hollywood personality and his wife allegedly at the hands of their son. You might recall that a friend of the couple publicly posted his personal remorse, as I understand it, over not challenging the couple to hold their son accountable for his behavior. (Was he afraid of being perceived as judgmental?)

How often must we hear the Left proclaiming their hatred for the police, their demand that jail populations be released, and their scorn for parental discipline of children, before we acknowledge that it appears that they actually favor bad results and are not compassionate at all?

In this same vein is the reality that even before Dr. Spock, the Left lectured us from their ivory towers that it was detrimental to discipline children, that it “crushed their spirits” and “stifled their creativity.” Thus, in the name of compassion, we now allow and even encourage children to “follow their hearts” and do whatever they want.

They are told to reject anyone who tells them what to do as being “controlling” and “abusive.” The consequences of this disciplinary insanity have been catastrophic.

Thus, parents are “abusive” if they spank their children at two years of age but are loving and to be sympathized with if they allow their children total freedom, only to see those undisciplined children die of drug addiction or violence as teenagers. Such “compassion,” manifested in a lack of accountability, is not compassion at all.  Proverbs 13:24 notes that “he who spares his rod hates his son, but he who loves him disciplines him promptly.”

Fifth. Compassion is often painful in the short term. I expect that most people know someone who has had cancer. You may be like me. I have lost both of my parents and numerous friends to the disease! I witnessed the treatment they endured in seeking to beat the malady, and it was often horrific.

Leftist logic, I suppose, would suggest that such painful treatment is not compassionate. So, what is the compassionate way to deal with cancer? According to the philosophy  of the Left, we would tell the patient that they are fine just as they are, and that they should do whatever makes them feel good!

We would declare that the professionals who recommend chemotherapy and surgery along with restrictive diets to combat cancer are haters who have no compassion at all!

This is not farfetched. Consider what the Left offers for the problems of an unwanted pregnancy or the suffering of the elderly or depressed person: death! There may be no clearer evidence of the stark difference between the fake compassion of the Left and the genuine compassion of conservatism than that of abortion and euthanasia. In both cases the Left offers instant “compassion” in the form of death.

Interestingly, in both euthanasia and abortion, someone else has an easier life.  How convenient!

Conservatives, on the other hand, understand that real compassion is often quite inconvenient and sometimes costly. Genuine compassion does not consider what it costs, and it understands that compassion begins at home. It is not compassionate of me to take your money to give to a needy third party.

What a woman with a problem pregnancy and what an elderly or terminally ill patient needs is not a quick but deadly fix. They need compassionate care and support that reinforces their sense of personal worth and helps them find the strength to endure a difficult time.

As Christians we know that Christ Himself is available to those who trust Him to enable them to handle the most trying of circumstances.  “He is a very present help in trouble,” Psalm 46:1. Paul also promises that “(We) can do all things through Christ who strengthens (us),” Philippians 4:13.

There was a time when responsible voices in public forums would call for “tough love” for those living dangerous lifestyles. We would hear that young people enslaved by drugs, alcohol, pornography or other risky behavior needed someone to care enough to tell them what they needed to hear, not what they wanted to hear.

Today, such voices are silent as the Left dominates education, Hollywood, social and other media outlets delivering a message that can only be described as foolish and deadly. What they call compassion used to be called libertinism and debauchery. The death toll from their “compassion” grows larger with every passing day!

“With friends like that, who needs enemies?”