From: punditster@gmail.com   
      
   On 2/19/2026 8:05 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:   
   > NY Times,   
   >   
   > February 19, 2026   
   >   
   > The idea that compassion is toxic has damaged us   
   > By David French   
   >   
   What planet are you on, Sombrero?   
      
   David French, a columnist for The New York Times, strongly believes in   
   and frequently advocates for inalienable human rights. He grounds this   
   belief in the conviction that individuals are endowed by their creator   
   with rights such as life, liberty, and due process, which are essential   
   to human dignity.   
    >   
      
   > There’s a scene from a movie I can’t get out of my head.   
   > It’s from a 2021 film called “Don’t Look Up,” not my idea of a   
   > cinematic classic. It’s a dark comedy about the end of the world, an   
   > allegory intended to skewer those who are in denial about climate   
   > change, but in this film people are in denial about a comet that’s   
   > about to hit the earth.   
   >   
   > The movie is equal parts funny and preachy, but the ending is   
   > poignant. The main characters of the film are gathered around a dinner   
   > table, eating one last meal as they face the end. They’re trying to   
   > have a casual conversation as the table starts to rattle.   
   > In that moment — as we watch images of the beauty of earth flashing in   
   > front of us — the character played by Leonardo DiCaprio interrupts the   
   > small talk with these words:   
   >   
   > “The thing of it is, we really did have everything, didn’t we?”   
   >   
   > I don’t want to compare the second Trump term to a comet hitting the   
   > earth (or maybe I do), but it is absolutely true that we often can’t   
   > grasp what we had until we no longer have it. Tragedy and loss adjust   
   > our frame, and the disputes and arguments that once seemed so urgent   
   > can pale in comparison to new and terrible realities.   
   >   
   > Now let’s talk about empathy.   
   >   
   > A year ago this month, I wrote a newsletter warning about a new trend   
   > on the MAGA Christian right. Christian theologians and influencers had   
   > begun warning about the “sin of empathy” or “toxic empathy.”   
   > In books, essays, podcasts and speeches, prominent Christian   
   > influencers, ministers and theologians sounded the alarm that secular   
   > progressives were leading Christians astray by appealing to their   
   > emotions at the expense of their reason.   
   >   
   > The steel man version of their case goes like this:   
   > Progressives have turned Christians’ soft hearts against hard truths.   
   > Progressives have persuaded all too many Christians that the suffering   
   > of, say, undocumented immigrants or women facing unwanted pregnancies   
   > should override their concerns about the economic and social costs of   
   > large-scale immigration, or their compassion for victims of crimes   
   > committed by immigrants, or their concerns about the plight of the   
   > unborn child.   
   >   
   > Sometimes, as the argument goes, you have to do tough, hard things.   
   > That means mass deportation. That means cutting off aid to the poor   
   > and vulnerable in the developing world. That means ending gay marriage   
   > even if it breaks up families. And that means the strictest possible   
   > pro-life laws, even when the life or physical health of the mother   
   > might be at stake, or sending mothers to jail for aborting their   
   > child.   
   >   
   > And so, Christians, you have to steel yourselves to stand up for truth   
   > and righteousness, and accept the condemnation of a world that will   
   > call you cruel.   
   >   
   > As with many bad ideas, the attack on empathy is rooted in something   
   > real. Partisans tend to be terrible at showing the slightest empathy   
   > for “them,” the people on the other side.   
   >   
   > Immigration activists can be very good at highlighting the plight of   
   > migrants, for example, while ignoring or paying little attention to   
   > the costs of uncontrolled migration.   
   >   
   > Pro-choice activists are very effective at highlighting the   
   > difficulties facing pregnant women while downplaying the humanity of   
   > the baby emerging in the womb.   
   >   
   > During the pandemic, I was shocked at the lack of concern or outright   
   > mockery in some quarters for the deaths of unvaccinated Americans.   
   > The converse is true as well. Immigration restrictionists are very   
   > good at highlighting the costs of mass migration — including the   
   > victims of violence committed by immigrants — without demonstrating   
   > much concern at all for the immigrants themselves.   
   >   
   > And while many pro-life activists care deeply for mother and child,   
   > that sentiment isn’t universal. A Republican candidate for governor in   
   > Tennessee, for example, has let the world know that he’s open to the   
   > idea of imposing the death penalty on women who get abortions.   
   > Arguments about the Middle East are sometimes the worst of all — it   
   > can be difficult to find anyone who prioritizes every life at stake in   
   > the seemingly endless wars between Israel and its foes.   
   > The problem in those cases isn’t with empathy, which is a vital human   
   > virtue, but rather in its selective application. Just as we wouldn’t   
   > call love a sin because we might be stingy in our love, empathy isn’t   
   > a sin because its application is incomplete.   
   >   
   > Or, put another way, our problem isn’t with too much empathy, but too   
   > little. We’re unwilling to place ourselves in other people’s shoes, to   
   > try to understand who they are and what their lives are like.   
   > It’s hard to talk about this issue without recognizing a fundamental   
   > truth of the moment: The attack on empathy would have gained very   
   > little traction in the church if Donald Trump weren’t president. He   
   > delights in vengeance, and he owes his presidency to the evangelical   
   > church.   
   >   
   > I’ve shared this statistic before, but if you look at 2024 exit   
   > polling, you’ll see that Trump won white evangelical and born-again   
   > voters by a 65-point margin, 82 percent to 17 percent. He lost   
   > everyone else by 18 points, 58 percent to 40 percent.   
   > Given the sharp differences between Trump and every other Republican   
   > president of the modern era, in my experience evangelicals are   
   > desperate to to rationalize their support for a man who gratuitously   
   > and intentionally inflicts unnecessary suffering on his opponents.   
   > And that’s exactly how empathy becomes a sin.   
   >   
   > And because empathy is a sin, virtually any appeal to consider the   
   > suffering of Trump’s opponents becomes yet more proof that Christians   
   > are being manipulated, that their emotions are used against them.   
   > Are you concerned about children who might die because we gratuitously   
   > and needlessly cut billions of dollars of foreign aid? That’s toxic   
   > empathy. Are you worried about the conditions in detention facilities   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)