Competing Definitions of Compassion

The political Left has leveled strong accusations at conservatives, labeling them “unloving” or “intolerant” — particularly those afflicted with Trump Derangement Syndrome. Many if not most, not just liberals but Democrat Party members, view support for Donald Trump as inherently “hateful,” incompatible with Christian values, and out of sync with true compassion.

However, these criticisms reveal a profound misunderstanding of a common sense philosophy on love and philanthropy. The Left and the Right have fundamentally different interpretations of what it means to care for others, protect communities, and promote well-being. While both sides want a better world, their vision for what that actually means and approaches diverge sharply, particularly around questions of security, fairness, and personal responsibility.

Love and Safety in Immigration

One area where these contrasting perspectives are most vividly illustrated is immigration policy. The Left often argues that it is “unloving” or even “un-Christian” to restrict immigration, seeing it as a moral obligation to welcome anyone seeking asylum. They simply do not realize the difference between illegal immigration and legal immigration – fabricated asylum claims included.

Conservatives, on the other hand, argue that true compassion considers both the security of existing communities and the rights of refugees. They support welcoming genuine asylum seekers while advocating for secure borders to ensure that those entering are properly vetted, minimizing the risks of crime or human trafficking of women and children.

The conservative approach to immigration prioritizes the safety of everyone involved, including legal immigrants and citizens. The liberal knee-jerk response that America was founded by and is a nation of immigrants does not hold water. At the forming of our nation, the immigrants arrived ready to work for the American dream. This was long before the myriad of socialized taxpayer funded programs that provided food, shelter, housing, and medical care for all illegal immigrants – and before the formation of public schools which are already overcrowded in many urban areas. Immigration then and now is entirely a comparing apples and oranges scenario.

For conservatives, leaving borders open to unchecked immigration isn’t compassionate, as it opens up paths for exploitation, especially for vulnerable women and children trafficked by criminal organizations. The philosophy here is that love requires caution and wisdom, not just a blanket “welcome.”

Liberal love for all immigrants ends where their property lines begin. Remember the Democrat freak out when a small group of illegal immigrants was sent to Martha’s Vineyard? The liberal elites who live there rolled up the sanctuary state welcome mat in rapid fashion once the hoi polloi arrived on their upscale doorsteps. Where was their compassion and love? Gone, just like the immigrants themselves.

The Fairness of Protecting Women’s Sports and Spaces

Another polarizing issue is gender identity, particularly how it impacts women’s rights and safety. While the Left argues that preventing transgender individuals from participating in sports or accessing certain spaces is discriminatory, conservatives maintain that such policies are about fairness, privacy, and respect for biological differences.

Allowing transgender individuals to compete in girls and women’s sports or access women-only spaces, such as locker rooms and rest rooms, raises concerns not only about competitive fairness but also about the comfort and safety of biological women.

For conservatives, compassion means acknowledging the needs and dignity of all individuals—including biological women who may feel uncomfortable or unsafe when men and boys who claim they feel like females, invade their showers and gym floors. This philosophy doesn’t dismiss the struggles transgender people maintain they face, but suggests that truly loving solutions should respect the boundaries and rights of human beings.

The tragic story of Payton McNabb, a North Carolina volleyball player, clearly illustrates when conservatives are both so passionate and dripping with compassion for women and girls forced to play sports against genetic males. McNabb was hit so hard with a spike by a teen male who identified as female during her junior year, she was left partially paralyzed, suffers from vision issues, and chronic neurological problems stemming from the extreme brain trauma.

What Is Love? Competing Definitions of Compassion

The contrasting views on love and philanthropy stem from different philosophical foundations. The Left’s perspective often revolves around unconditional inclusion, viewing the extension of rights and privileges to as many people as possible as an expression of compassion. This view suggests that society should prioritize the immediate desires of minorities, sometimes even at the cost of the majority’s interests.

This same helping one while punishing the other issue is also reflected in our healthcare system since the approval of Obamacare. Since the passage of the Affordable Care Act Americans with pre-existing conditions can secure a reasonably priced medical insurance policy. But small business owners and independent contractors now cannot afford health insurance in many cases.

My Anthem policy pre-Obamacare was just $358 per month for a family policy. Post-Obamacare the cheapest (subpar in comparison) Anthem policy was $1,200 per month with a $12,500 deductible instead of the $1,200 deductible from the previous policy by the same provider. Nothing had changed in our medical or work history from one policy to the next. The closest hospital about 30 miles away was in network, but the doctors and technicians and X-ray department were not. So, when my husband contracted meningitis from tending to a victim on a fire call, we had to pay $28,500 out of pocket – on top of the ridiculously high monthly premium, for his care.

Hurting one group of Americans to help another is not o.k. nor is it compassionate or loving.

Conversely, conservatives see love as grounded in responsibility and realism. To them, true philanthropy respects the rights of the many, not just the needs of a select few, and considers the long-term impact of policies on communities as a whole.

Conservative values emphasize charity, justice, and respect for social and cultural structures that protect the vulnerable. For example, conservatives often argue that providing a framework of support for people in need is preferable to fostering generational dependence on government assistance. Conservatives see such temporar aid structures as uplifting, allowing individuals to achieve self-reliance rather than be seen as perpetual beneficiaries of taxpayer funded assistance.

Student Loan Forgiveness

Liberals applauded Joe Biden’s efforts to erase student aid. Forgiving consenting adults from a responsibility they were fully informed about and willingly accepted by signing on the bottom line is viewed as compassionate by the far left elites. But, they constantly think of government aid as “free money” and do not stop to ponder for even a moment where those dollars actually stem from…the American taxpayer. Men and women who worked hard to learn a trade to provide for their families without taking on massive debt, small business owners who sacrificed time with their family and worked tirelessly to get their business off the ground are just some of the folks who would have footed the bill for a twenty-something majoring in women’s studies or diversity at Ivy League colleges. Conservatives feel compassion for the unfairness of such policies because the blameless become the victims. Liberals, on the other hand, feel pity and love only for the willing who just might be forced to live up to their obligations.

When Compassion Backfires: The Unintended Consequences of Progressive Policies

From the conservative perspective, many Left-wing policies marketed as “loving” or “inclusive” ultimately result in more harm than good. For example, policies that decriminalize certain behaviors, like drug use or petty theft, in the name of “compassion” for so-called “marginalized” groups can often lead to an increase in crime rates, impacting entire communities. When leniency is extended without accountability, society may experience a decline in public safety and an erosion of community trust.

Likewise, unrestricted gender identity policies in schools and youth sports can compromise the safety and development of young people. Many parents worry about the privacy of their children and believe that unfiltered access to personal spaces, such as bathrooms and changing rooms, is unsafe. In this view, compassionate policies should prioritize child safety and parental rights, not cater to ideological trends that may have unintended harmful effects.

The Need for Balance: A Call for Inclusive Solutions

Both conservatives and liberals share a concern for those in need and a desire for a just society. However, solutions must be balanced. While the Left often focuses on individual identity and personal affirmation, the Right seeks to uphold a broader sense of community order, fairness, and security. To reach mutual understanding, we must recognize that true compassion doesn’t ignore consequences for the many in favor of benefits for the few.

As a society, a balanced approach would respect individual identities while also upholding the integrity and safety of public spaces, safeguarding competitive fairness, and ensuring that humanitarian policies genuinely serve those in need without compromising community welfare. True love and philanthropy can—and should—seek common ground, where compassion respects the boundaries that protect everyone’s dignity and well-being.

Conclusion

In the end, love and philanthropy can take many forms, and these definitions vary widely between political ideologies. Rather than assuming ill-intent or hatred, it is more productive to seek understanding and appreciate that conservatives’ caution comes not from a lack of compassion but from a commitment to balanced, sustainable, and protective policies. Real love, from this perspective, ensures safety and well-being for everyone—providing a stable foundation where true generosity and community care can flourish.

Author Profile
Tara Dodrill

Tara Dodrill is a self-reliance author, educator, and patriot homesteader in Appalachia. She studied journalism at Ohio University and previously served several terms as a town council member in her hometown. Dodrill worked as the editor of her county's newspaper before shifting her focus to writing books and hosting the largest hands-on homesteading, survival, and bushcraft annual event in the United States.

Author Profile
Tara Dodrill

Tara Dodrill is a self-reliance author, educator, and patriot homesteader in Appalachia. She studied journalism at Ohio University and previously served several terms as a town council member in her hometown. Dodrill worked as the editor of her county's newspaper before shifting her focus to writing books and hosting the largest hands-on homesteading, survival, and bushcraft annual event in the United States.