Posted on 06/06/2007 1:17:58 AM PDT by neverdem
The term "bleeding-heart liberal" has been bandied about for years, in an effort to illustrate the faux or at least hyperbolic sense of compassion attributed to those on the left. The lefties in America and Europe would like to be known as those who care, unless you happen to be a Bible-following Christian, a conservative or a fetus.
"[Most] confusion... in spiritual circles ....comes from confusing compassion with idiot compassion."
"Idiot compassion" thinks it is being kind, but it's really being cruel. If you have an alcoholic friend and you know that one more drink might kill him, and yet he begs you for a drink, does real compassion say that you should give it to him? After all, to be kind you should give him what he wants, right? Giving him the drink would therefore show compassion, yes? No. Absolutely not.
"Real compassion includes wisdom and so it makes judgments of care and concern; it says some things are good, and some things are bad, and I will choose to act only on those things that are informed by wisdom and care."
Wanna bet we will see this column printed in the “Faith & Religion” section of any west coast newspapers?
Buddhism ping.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus


Idiot Compassion..... Allowing the mentally ill/criminally insane to hold office.
And I’ll bet at least 3 to 5 names just filled your head! :-)
I need to print and frame this.
The logic doesn’t follow. While I support capital punishment, I respect the point-of-view of those who do not. The last time I debated an opponent of capital punishment, her reasoning was solid and her argument compelling--and had nothing whatsoever to do with 'since all killing is bad, it must be bad to kill Islamic terrorists or convicted murderers'. The author created a straw man when he wrote that, and--since he is an attorney as well as a 'student of Buddhism'--knew he was committing a fallacy. Further, I don’t view opponents of capital punishment as ‘addle-brained protesters’, nor do I lump them in with human shields vacuously unable to draw even the most rudimentary moral distinctions. The author, it seems, is as guilty of lack of discernment as those he so roundly condemns. Didn't the Buddha preach 'Right Thinking'? Doesn't law school teach the fundamentals of reasoned argument?
Well, I went off. I cornered my kids and made them listen to the idiot then gave them a little lecture. In the example I gave, I recalled an issue I'd had with my son at the beginning of the school year. He'd forgotten his homework, called home and begged me to bring it to him. I told him, "This is your *ONE* freebie for the year. I will only do this for you one time, after that, you're on your own. Are you sure you want to use it right now?" He assured me that this assignment was *that* important and I took his homework up to the school for him.
Later that *same* week, he called again in a total panic. He'd forgotten his homework and *this* assignment was *SO* much more important than the last!
I told him, "tough cookies," and hung up. He hasn't forgotten another assignment.
I told the kids that I *did* hurt for him at that moment. I was tempted to help him. But I knew, if I did, that he'd never learn responsibility and I'd be handicapping him for life. I told them that *this* is the difference between the left and right. The left feels compassion for the moment, the right looks down the road and sees that it's sometimes better to allow someone to suffer a little now so they don't suffer forever.
Over and over I've seen this example played out in real life. I see the young woman who's parents never gave her a break and pushed her to be smart and do her best and I see the young woman who had (at least one) parent who enabled her to get away with murder out of a displaced feeling of "compassion". And I see the end results.
NO. Compassion does NOT mean giving and enabling and sheltering people from the natural consequences of their own actions. Compassion allows us to help people who've genuinely been screwed by life or other people, not by themselves.
This is the difference between those who ‘feel’ and those who ‘think’.
Thanks for the compliment, and putting up with my choices in articles for a ping, aka teaching. Docs are supposed to do it. A well informed electorate won't hurt.
Or even any midwest newspaper.
I didn't go to law school. For terrorism and civil cases, I'll use the preponderance of evidence standard, not beyond the reasonable evidence of doubt standard for criminal cases.
Did you read the article? Or, does the fact that it was written by a Bhuddist bother you?
“The host referred to liberals as “compassionate” and conservatives as “mean”.
My theory (maybe lame brained)is that the driving force behind radical liberal ideas is Narcissism - that is, an unhealthy preoccupation with your own feelings, and how you feel a need to project those feelings with the aim of public approval. Narcissism clouds the mind, so for example, when faced with a choice or dilemma, you or me would put some thought into your decision, make a choice and that would be it. With a Narcissist, however, their first reaction is “what is the right way of describing this situation ?” or “how will I look in the eyes of others” ; their secondary reaction will be that any disadvantaged person is in difficulty because someone, or something, is to blame.
Another symptom of this is the person’s obsession with levelling ie. every single human being is equal. Taken to extreme the tribesman running through the New Guinea jungle is equal to the Wall St fund manager living on Park Avenue.
Modern Narcissism really took off on America’s West coast in the mid 60s (sorry some of you freepers!) but it has spread out all over the Western World. However, of all the first world , developed societies Liberal Narcissism will have the least success in the United States.I say this from visiting and speaking to people over there, and it strikes me that you Yanks, unlike Europeans, are an obstinate bunch - decent and honest - but will not allow noisy minority interest groups to tell you what to say and think.
I mean, Free Republic is proof of this.
Of course this is only a theory, after all I am I am only a commercial real estate agent not an anthropologist; so it goes without saying reply if you think this is wrong.
“I cornered my kids”
meanie
;-)
[I'm at work ... and you want me to think too?] Cad!
I've studied narcissism intimately and I definitely agree. Do I need mention I was once a liberal...
Were you liberal ?
Theres nothing wrong with it - in theory, I think Fr Rep people are liberal in the sense that they believe in live and let live.
A lot of lefties fret about such things as imbalance of wealth, pollution, racism, war etc. and funnily enough , in theory I agree with some of what they have to say.BUT, and this is a very important caveat, here we are, in this particular world, in this particular time, and it is easier and more practical to just roll your sleeves up and make the best of life.
You know it! ;-)
What the left defines as social justice, I call narcissism, because it is narcissism to assume that your definition of justice is universal.
What the left calls compassion, I call codependency because it's codependent to use the power of government to assume/take what is other people's responsibility.
If spiritual growth is all about assuming 100% of one's personal responsibility; then the left, which does everything it can to take people's responsibility ( in the name of help); cannot be compatible with spiritual growth.
“that you Yanks, unlike Europeans, are an obstinate bunch - decent and honest - but will not allow noisy minority interest groups to tell you what to say and think”.
I appreciate your compliment, but I only wish it were true. IMO, we have far too many Americans willing to swallow the liberal lie hook, line and sinker!
Huh? Not sure what you are getting at.
Am I bothered that a Buddhist wrote it?
Should I be?
Except for the obsessed person, who believes he or she is "above" everyone else and knows best how they should run their lives.
Any chance it's still got the same ol' magic?
Any chance at all???
"Idiot compassion" means no right to be silent? And no right to counsel during questioning? Hmm.
Your first post to this thread was "Wanna bet we will see this column printed in the Faith & Religion section of any west coast newspapers?"
I took that to mean that you think because it's Buddhism, that it shouldn't be posted in any "Faith & Religion" section. As it it's not a legitimate religion. If not then why ask the question?
Your second post shows a reference to a man immolating himself who is a Buddhist. I was trying to understand the point you were trying to make. It seems to me that you are denigrating Buddhism. What is YOUR point?
My question was merely rhetorical. Most "Faith & Religion" columns in West Coast papers include a diversity of religions, including Buddhism. However, this was one article I am betting is probably not going to get printed in any MSM paper.
Your second post shows a reference to a man immolating himself who is a Buddhist. I was trying to understand the point you were trying to make. It seems to me that you are denigrating Buddhism. What is YOUR point?
I was not denigrating Buddhism. I was merely presenting a graphic example of the title of this thread, and the subject of Ralph Alter's article.
Okay, I get it now. It's because it uses Buddhism as a way of slamming socialism. You are right, there.
I was not denigrating Buddhism. I was merely presenting a graphic example of the title of this thread, and the subject of Ralph Alter's article.
Put together with your explanation I understand now. Thanks. Sorry if I offended. I really didn't know what you were getting at.
Enjoy your day. Ray
Very well put...and very wise!
No problem! You're one of my favorite posters. :-)
Not to hijack the conversation, but it's also narcissism to believe that the climate, as it is now, is the ultimate climate. I suppose we can project this theory on to the "global warming" controversy.
Thank you LK. I try to pound wisdom into my children as well as I can. (My daughter gets it - my son... well, he still thinks he can out-smart reality.)
Britain is becoming increasingly more centralized, despite Wales, Scotland, and N Ireland having new Parliaments. The are attempts to bring in new laws which will effectively prohibit criticism of minority groups;there might be an even more generous Dole (welfare) system, and a bureaucracy bigger than the US Army.
I don’t blame the Liberal lobby for this I blame the British public for taking a bigger interest in Soccer, alchohol, and topless actresses than in what is being done in their name. After all a nation gets the politicians it deserves.
The States, however, is more a federation of 51 countries (if you lke) each with its own Capital, Parliament (or is it Assembly) and Police force. Don’t they even have their own Army - the National Guard ?
Any way the point I am trying to make Hanneybean, is that yes, there are parts of America where this loony liberal mindset may be catching on, but in the long term your 51 states are a firewall against socialism, and equally, against Nazism.
So to sum it up, American liberalism will prove to be a here today, gone tomorrow, idea.
Well, it goes right along with the rest of the left's narcissism, so, why not? I've thought so as well.
When I was deep into the study of my own narcissism, I had the thought that if I subtracted everything I said that came out of my narcissism, I'd have nothing left to say. The Democrats could well be the same.
We were discussing global warming and environmentalism one day ( I have a degree in earth science, so they were asking me if I thought global warming was a problem).I pointed out that the planet had had many climates in it's past history, and would always be changing. That no matter how many restrictions one placed on a wilderness area, it's natural state would inevitably change over time, even without human intervention.NOthing can really be preserved.
I asked them; what would you do if everything was OK, just as it was ? I thought it very telling that they all became visibly agitated. They simply are unable to imagine a situation where they are not needed to save something.
That shows that their helping is all about them. In fact, I think it's one reason narcissists are drwn to environmentalism and animals. The earth, and animals are not going to argue back that they don't want to be helped, as many people will do. (remember the troops answer to the attempt by Kerry to be their un-asked for saviour?). It makes their self-congratulations easier.
"Sometimes the most compassionate thing you can do for someone is beat the living crap out of them!" - (my teacher) Gotta love him! ;^)
I know this reply is a month late, but thank you for Getting It! Now if you could only explain it to our Blue Staters...
What is a Blue Stater ?
Any chance it's still got the same ol' magic?
Any chance at all???
Perhaps I'm mistaken but I sure don't seem to remember that happening.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.