Time To Define Compassion

Dictionary.com defines compassion as:
com·pas·sion /kəmˈpæʃən/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[kuhm-pash-uhn] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1.
a feeling of deep sympathy and sorrow for another who is stricken by misfortune, accompanied by a strong desire to alleviate the suffering. –verb (used with object)
2.
Archaic. to compassionate.

In out present day world we see compassion displayed in many ways. Most are very legitimate. We have people who selflessly spend many hours of their lives doing for others. We have people that give huge sums of money. Bill Gates is one of these people. Great admiration is due all of these people.

The people I want to talk about today are the ones who use compassion as an argument to further political agenda. I am not saying that these people are not sincere, on the contrary I believe the vast majority of them are. They truly believe their actions will help the people that they are lobbying for. Most often I believe their actions make themselves feel better, but it doesn't help others. I believe they are wrong. My opinions may be controversial. I do not intend them to be offensive, but no doubt some will see it that way. That is regrettable. If you read this please read it in the way it was intended, an alternative way of thinking intended to help.

There are so many examples I want to take just a couple. Inner city poor people are victims of this syndrome. Many of these people, but certainly not all are in their predicament because of bad personal choices. One of the most destructive choices we see is young women who have children in high school or shortly afterward. It is considered compassionate to sign the young woman up for many government programs and she and her future child become a virtual ward of the state. The intention of this of course is so she can use the help to assist her in getting her education, and try to get a leg up on beginning her life on her own. Personally I don't see how this can be compassionate. This young woman of course can have the baby killed in the first three months as it is her right to do by a thing called Roe vs. Wade, also not compassionate.

The alternative that far too few women choose is adoption. I see this as one of the most compassionate things she can do for her unborn child. The child can be given a family that most likely will have a mother and father who are prepared and capable of giving the baby a home. What the young woman has to look forward to is long hours trying to make a living, maybe going to school and in the spare time trying to find some time to love her baby. This time often gets left out. I believe each of these women try their level best to be a great mother. It is just too big of a job for one person. This is seen as compassion. If the multitude of government programs did not exist, many more of these young women would make the choice that benefits their unborn child, adoption. That would be compassion. The baby gets a home and the woman gets the chance to pursue her life and dreams.

One more area I want to talk about for this piece. Government support. Political people on the left and right have very different ideas about what is compassionate for the poor. People on the left believe that government programs are compassionate. People on the right tend to believe that charity programs, often faith based charities are compassionate. My view of course is that government programs are cruel. People who may be down on their luck, or habitual get a one size fits all program that gives them subsistence, not a living. Again, some people use this as a chance to get their lives back on track. Far too many get trapped into a life of subsistence. This inevitably leads to bitterness and despair. It is a bureaucracy, not help. Faith based charities offer people a new outlook. They offer a meal, comfort and often real life help. I believe this is compassion. People who live on government support know they won't get rich, their lives won't get very much better. In time this leads again to despair. People who are helped by charities may or may not get a better life, but they are told they can make a better life by people who genuinely care. The people in the government side also care, but are overloaded, and limited by what they can give. This is not compassion. The despair I spoke of before inevitably takes away survival skills. This is cruel in my way of thinking.

Even if everyone saw my way of thinking tonight, pulling the rug out from under people could not and should not happen. Too many of these people have no idea how to support themselves. Additionally not all government programs should be taken away. People who are not physically able to work need to be helped. Other such circumstances as well. Gradually taking away the duplicated programs until the able bodied start to be able to take care of themselves. I see this as compassionate. I don't believe it is easy, but I do believe it is necessary. As a society we need to looks at what works, not what feels good.