Compasion.

[Care4all]

Where is the line drawn for you to show compassion and/or how far will you go personally?

Is it a sign of weakness to have compassion?

Why would anyone think compassion was a weakness? Not to show/have it is a sign of being dead inside imo.

IOU rep...

 

[FireGod]

Your time doesn't cost you anything?

On one hand, of course my time is valuable. On the other hand, it's my time to use as I see fit and for the purpose I think is best. If I think spending a few minutes showing compassion for a person in need is a valuable enough use of my time as to consider it no harm to me, who is anyone else to say it's not?

Of course I have no problem with that. Unfortunately, some people go too far personally to help someone in need and end up harming themselves or their families. This is probably what the OP had in mind.

Actually the OP is trying to understand the thinking of others. And yes sometimes people do go too far.

 

[Care4all]

Compassion is just a feeling. So unless you actually do something based on that feeling, i dont really see the issue.

Is it not also defined as an act?

yes, there is most certainly 'ACTS of Compassion'...

ACTS stands for ACTIONS of compassion.

I think Avatar was speaking about people that just use the term and actually show no ACTS...

maybe like the ''compassionate conservatives'' and their movement or lack there of is what he means? j/k

I am certain THAT is not what Avatar was referring to....in case you haven't noticed, it would not be him, unless he slammed the democrats or liberals for something....

 

[Care4all]

Your time doesn't cost you anything?

On one hand, of course my time is valuable. On the other hand, it's my time to use as I see fit and for the purpose I think is best. If I think spending a few minutes showing compassion for a person in need is a valuable enough use of my time as to consider it no harm to me, who is anyone else to say it's not?

Of course I have no problem with that. Unfortunately, some people go too far personally to help someone in need and end up harming themselves or their families. This is probably what the OP had in mind.

Ahhhhh, my mother in law....(while she was alive) who enabled through her stupidity and not compassion as she thought, my sister in law, and her drug habbit...

 

[xsited1]

There is a time and place for the government to provide for the general welfare, but most of the entitlement programs on the books are counter productive and devoid of compassion.

Ok how so?

Welfare dependency. This can lead to a whole host of social ills that include a breakdown of the family, poverty and violence, just to name a few problems. It's important to help your fellow man, but the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

 

[FireGod]

On one hand, of course my time is valuable. On the other hand, it's my time to use as I see fit and for the purpose I think is best. If I think spending a few minutes showing compassion for a person in need is a valuable enough use of my time as to consider it no harm to me, who is anyone else to say it's not?

Of course I have no problem with that. Unfortunately, some people go too far personally to help someone in need and end up harming themselves or their families. This is probably what the OP had in mind.

Ahhhhh, my mother in law....(while she was alive) who enabled through her stupidity and not compassion as she thought, my sister in law, and her drug habbit...

Was it not compassion from her point of view?
What are your personal lines?

 

[Care4all]

Of course I have no problem with that. Unfortunately, some people go too far personally to help someone in need and end up harming themselves or their families. This is probably what the OP had in mind.

Ahhhhh, my mother in law....(while she was alive) who enabled through her stupidity and not compassion as she thought, my sister in law, and her drug habbit...

Was it not compassion from her point of view?
What are your personal lines?

oh, NO DOUBT it was compassion from my mother in laws perspective.....she was good to the very bone! But this did enable her daughter, in many various ways....but that's okay, she did what she felt she had to, to keep a roof over her daughter's head and not out on the streets walking....the sad thing is, is now that my mother in law is not around, she is out there, walkin...street walkin to support her habbit.

As for me....I am compassionate to most every one and also show acts of compassion....I have a gift of being able to empathize and 'feel' what others are feeling....their pain, their sorrow, their regrets, their hopelessness.... it really is NOT a gift...it brings much sorrow to my own heart...

 

[Toronado3800]

Compassion....that is what I show to the helpless by offering the truly disabled disability checks from social security or by spending my own time re-hanging gutters for the elderly in my family who can't cook.

More often I do this trading thing. Example, one of my friends has no car. I give the fella a ride here or there and he's good company and buys lunch. Even seems he'll go to the junkyard with me and help when I need a part so the deal works.

My sister in law is the opposite. Neither the gal nor her husband will go to the junkyard with me and pull this piece they need for their Saturn (hit a deer!), so screw them. I'm not helping.

********
On the government level I figure if enough folks didn't want a republic or voted against this or that representative who was in favor of aid to Israel eventually it would stop. Until then apparently more folks either don't care or support government compassion/aid.

Personally I don't always even think of most long term welfare type aid for under performing Americans as being compassionate on my part. I just don't want them poor folks to become desperate enough to be kidnapping our children for ransom as a way to earn a buck.

 

[xsited1]

On one hand, of course my time is valuable. On the other hand, it's my time to use as I see fit and for the purpose I think is best. If I think spending a few minutes showing compassion for a person in need is a valuable enough use of my time as to consider it no harm to me, who is anyone else to say it's not?

Of course I have no problem with that. Unfortunately, some people go too far personally to help someone in need and end up harming themselves or their families. This is probably what the OP had in mind.

Ahhhhh, my mother in law....(while she was alive) who enabled through her stupidity and not compassion as she thought, my sister in law, and her drug habbit...

A friend recently lost a son to drugs. He thought he was acting in a compassionate manner, but he was mostly an enabler. His son was in his early 20s. I don't know if I would have done anything differently if I had been in his position.

 

[FireGod]

it really is NOT a gift...it brings much sorrow to my own heart...

Being an empath is a PITA, compartmentalization seems to work though along with a very strong sense of self.

 

[Toronado3800]

There is a very fine and fuzzy line between enabling and being compassionate. I can't always tell where it is and sympathize with enablers who are doing so much in an attempt to help.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Where is the line drawn for you to show compassion and/or how far will you go personally?

Is it a sign of weakness to have compassion?

I generally draw the line on compassion at the point where it goes over into pity, because I don't think pity is of much use to anyone. And it seems to me that compassion is a sign of strength, since one only extends generosity when one feels that he has enough largesse to share it with others.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Where is the line drawn for you to show compassion and/or how far will you go personally?

Is it a sign of weakness to have compassion?

That's a huge topic! Compassion can be a sign of weakness when people elect politicians who use the Government as an agency of compassion.

That isn't really compassion, though. They label it as such, but it isn't. It's really a power play on the part of the politicians and the people voting for them.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Compassion a weakness? If anything, the opposite is true. Only those who are already weak are insecure enough to think showing compassion for others weakens them.

I will go as far as I can without jeopardizing my ability to care for my own, I also will not enable destructive behavior. But most of the time compassion doesn't mean giving materially, just a little of your time and attention. That doesn't cost me anything, so why not?

"Showing" compassion is great when YOU are the one doing it on your own time and on your own dime. I think that's the debate.

For the federal gubmint to "show" compassion, though, is to use the resources entrusted to them for specirfic purposes in a fashion NOT specifically authorized.

Now, even though I think that's a less lofty form of "compassion" (I could be REAL generous to any number of charities , for instance, if I had access to YOUR bank account), there are times I think it IS appropriate for the Federal Government to show "compassion" to the suffering folks on planet Earth. Recent example: The people of Haiti. It may not be the proper job of the federal government to give away maybe a billion or more dollars to a foreign land suffering from a natural disaster, but I endorse it all the same.

There are also other kinds of compassion. A drug abuser (addict) might commit some drug-related crime and face a long prison term. But, the law sometimes authorizes a judge to show a bit of compassion, instead, and "sentence" the addict/criminal to a period of REHAB in a drug treatment center, instead. That's a fair form of compassion, too.

Forgive me for pointing this out, but the OP addressed what we think and would do personally, not what political policies we do or would support. For a lot of us that's a whole separate issue.

But for many people, it's not, which I think was the point. Many people think they are being compassionate by shoving responsibility for it off onto a bureaucracy. True compassion, though, is about the person receiving it. THAT sort of "compassion" is all about self-glorification of the person extending it.

 

[goldcatt]

"Showing" compassion is great when YOU are the one doing it on your own time and on your own dime. I think that's the debate.

For the federal gubmint to "show" compassion, though, is to use the resources entrusted to them for specirfic purposes in a fashion NOT specifically authorized.

Now, even though I think that's a less lofty form of "compassion" (I could be REAL generous to any number of charities , for instance, if I had access to YOUR bank account), there are times I think it IS appropriate for the Federal Government to show "compassion" to the suffering folks on planet Earth. Recent example: The people of Haiti. It may not be the proper job of the federal government to give away maybe a billion or more dollars to a foreign land suffering from a natural disaster, but I endorse it all the same.

There are also other kinds of compassion. A drug abuser (addict) might commit some drug-related crime and face a long prison term. But, the law sometimes authorizes a judge to show a bit of compassion, instead, and "sentence" the addict/criminal to a period of REHAB in a drug treatment center, instead. That's a fair form of compassion, too.

Forgive me for pointing this out, but the OP addressed what we think and would do personally, not what political policies we do or would support. For a lot of us that's a whole separate issue.

But for many people, it's not, which I think was the point. Many people think they are being compassionate by shoving responsibility for it off onto a bureaucracy. True compassion, though, is about the person receiving it. THAT sort of "compassion" is all about self-glorification of the person extending it.

My problem with liumping in the political is that real "compassion" is an individual emotion, expressed by individual action.

I agree that shoving responsibility off onto a bureaucracy is not compassion. (Although I suspect we would disagree about what extent doing so is in the national interest.) But those are policy questions that have rational, ideally unemotional arguments for and against supporting various positions. Compassion is emotional and human by definition - not political and bureaucratic.

 

[FireGod]

Where is the line drawn for you to show compassion and/or how far will you go personally?

Is it a sign of weakness to have compassion?

I generally draw the line on compassion at the point where it goes over into pity, because I don't think pity is of much use to anyone. And it seems to me that compassion is a sign of strength, since one only extends generosity when one feels that he has enough largesse to share it with others.

So does generosity = compassion or is it just a part of compassion or are the two totally different animals?

 

[Smartt33]

Where is the line drawn for you to show compassion and/or how far will you go personally?

Is it a sign of weakness to have compassion?

Compassion is something that all people can have. We tend to control it, or allow it to be controlled by our attitudes and biases. However, as a Christian, I believe compassion takes on a whole new demension. I believe it is more consistent, and when we try to cover it up, the Holy Spirit lets us know.

I am driven by compassion quite often. My heart is where my treasure is, and that treasure is Jesus. The more time I spend with Him, the more compassion I have, and the more it exposes itself.

The line, I let God draw that line these days. Political correctness and peer pressure might try to hold power of my compassion, but I have discovered that compassion wins when we let it. When compassion wins, everyone wins.

It is far from a sign of weakness. It is in fact a sign of emoptional and spiritual strength.

 

[Cecilie1200]

There is a very fine and fuzzy line between enabling and being compassionate. I can't always tell where it is and sympathize with enablers who are doing so much in an attempt to help.

Seems like true compassion would be genuinely helpful. Enabling is more like pity.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Forgive me for pointing this out, but the OP addressed what we think and would do personally, not what political policies we do or would support. For a lot of us that's a whole separate issue.

But for many people, it's not, which I think was the point. Many people think they are being compassionate by shoving responsibility for it off onto a bureaucracy. True compassion, though, is about the person receiving it. THAT sort of "compassion" is all about self-glorification of the person extending it.

My problem with liumping in the political is that real "compassion" is an individual emotion, expressed by individual action.

I agree that shoving responsibility off onto a bureaucracy is not compassion. (Although I suspect we would disagree about what extent doing so is in the national interest.) But those are policy questions that have rational, ideally unemotional arguments for and against supporting various positions. Compassion is emotional and human by definition - not political and bureaucratic.

Helping people is the job of other people. The government's job is to facilitate individual action. Or prohibit it, where appropriate. It is not the government's job to help people precisely because a bureaucracy cannot be compassionate.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Where is the line drawn for you to show compassion and/or how far will you go personally?

Is it a sign of weakness to have compassion?

I generally draw the line on compassion at the point where it goes over into pity, because I don't think pity is of much use to anyone. And it seems to me that compassion is a sign of strength, since one only extends generosity when one feels that he has enough largesse to share it with others.

So does generosity = compassion or is it just a part of compassion or are the two totally different animals?

Compassion requires generosity of spirit, the willingness to help others. But it also includes tough love, the ability and willingness to say, "I will help you, but you must fix yourself."