Do not commit the sin of empathy.
Do not commit the sin of empathy.
https://x.com/roybelly/status/1882945942477029771
Context for the title, in case you're wondering: https://archive.is/UL7jK
95 comments
-
If Jesus showed up he would be considered a radical woke liberal.
"Love your neighbor" somehow became report your neighbor to ICE
To be fair to Trump, ideology is always co-opted and interpreted however convenient. The Nazis were "socialist" after all. NK is a people's republic. etc
-
And then they discovered the true meaning of Christianity, not a story about the son of the Creator preaching and living faith, charity and humility, but a scheme to blame the murder of that prophet which was committed by the Romans who founded the church, on the ethnic group the prophet came from, the Jewish group which was historically enslaved and persecuted by the Romans.
The biggest myth in the bible isn't whether Jesus existed, or Adam and Eve ate of the fruit, tricked by the serpent (although establishing the reason for humanity's inherent evil, the whole justification for religious belief itself, according to some, is a big one). The biggest myth is the one that makes you the main perpetrator of your own suffering, while the victimizers live in palaces and mansions where most suffering can never touch them.
We should have listened when Nietzsche said "God is dead, and we have killed him." If we had listened maybe we would have asked what had replaced him. And if someone says "nothing" then they still believe the biggest myths of the bible.
-
Reminds me of that story a couple of days ago about the homeless guy that got ran over by a bulldozer when they cleared out his tent to tidy up the city for MLK day. Nothing says you admire MLK like killing some poors, right?
-
Country that has never once given a shit about fire codes suddenly discovers an excuse to arbitrarily emiserate dozens of people.
-
This is a lot like how our government is all concerned about National Security™ when it comes to pretty much anything else, but a bipartisan bill, supported by both of the last 2 presidents, and upheld unanimously by our current dysfunctional Supreme Court, with National Security™ as the excuse, and we still have Tiktok.
Laws are only there so the ruling class can keep us in line and them in power, and they will never be enforced homogenously.
-
People will say "I don't need God in my life to be a good person" out one side of their mouth, while out the other say, "People need laws and the state to be a good person." I'm an atheist just like them, I just go one god further.
-
-
I'd love to talk shit about the current administration too, but I've been in buildings where fire inspectors would cut off the power cords of any space heaters they found because they violated code.
-
Probably should give a shit about fire codes everywhere else too tbqh
-
-
love is illegal in the US
-
Trump is the great Deceiver, like Lucifer he casts a light in darkness, and just like Lucifer all who follow that light expecting to find freedom will only find damnation.
-
Completely true. Now we just need to convince everyone else
-
-
Kinda surprised Americans don’t worship Constantine.
-
If they cared about history before 1776 they would.
-
The world was created only about 3000 years ago. There was no world before AMERICA
-
-
Isn't that the name of the Keanu Reeves movie about the guy who killed himself and now he's damned for all time and works for the Church, and the Archangel Gabriel was there, but he was played by a woman who kinda looks like the "perfect" chick from Fifth Element?
-
-
This whole thing is really disingenuous. Here's the article. HOWEVER. Look who represented the pastor: First Liberty. They're a law group that only takes ideological cases, cases that would allow Christians to violate laws with impunity. This initial case was covered by The Friendly Atheist (Hemant Mehta) a few months back; it's not a simple case of a kind-hearted pastor trying to help homeless people, and accidentally violating some zoning codes along the way.
-
Your link doesn't paint a different picture than the OP.
-
IIRC the conditions were exceptionally bad, and the action appeared to be tailored to make a legal argument that a (Christian) church wasn't bound by things like health and safety codes, occupancy limits, or zoning.
It's strategically created to make the Christian church in question seem sympathetic, although he could have moved to a different location, and/or complied with health and safety codes.
Again - look for what Hemant Mehta has written about this. I can't find the podcast ATM, and I'm too sick (flu) to spend all day trying to find anything he would have written about it.
-
-
At least you're consistent with not wanting Christians to get special treatment
-
I would love it if Christians would actually help homeless people rather than using them in a legal ploy to expand religious exceptionalism.
-
-
-
What would Jesus do
-
Jesus turns water into wine. The human body is 70% water. Earth is like 60% water. Jesus was an alcoholic.
-
-
There is no such thing as a "sin of empathy" and the dude who came up with that phrase is a fascist shitbag.
-
I dunno. Sithrak may be offended by empathy, kindness and compassion. He's a pain and misery kind of god.
-
He is an insane god for insane times.
-
-
-
"The Sin of Empathy" would be a sweet rock band name except it's not really rock so it can be a punk band name.
-
I get the sentiment for this one, but the pastor in question is simply acting like they're above the law. Hemant Mehta (AKA "The Friendly Atheist") covered this story on his YouTube channel:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JrlUNGFVN4I&pp=ygUgVGhlIGZyaWVuZGx5IGF0aGVpc3Qgb2hpbyBwYXN0b3I%3D
The short of it is that where this pastor's church is set up is not in the right zone for housing people, the building isn't designed for it, and he's actually puttinf them in danger. And on top of having already been in trouble for this once, I found out in the process of finding the first video that he's still doing it!
That said, I still up-voted the post, because while the pastor is actually in the wrong, so is the state. There's zero reason why these people should have to resort to sheltering in a building that isn't safe just to avoid succumbing to the elements.
-
Wow, the guy you linked comes off as a total tool. Pretty much all the city violations he's creepily giddy to list off with his Ajit Pai smile all turn into a moot point when the alternative is LITERALLY SLEEPING ON THE STREET. You think someone gives a single shit if there aren't enough visible exit signs? You think they care if the functioning smoke detectors don't have a record of regular inspections? He also lists off how "dangerous" the homeless are, with their drug use and past crimes. Yea, they're fucking homeless. What? You think they all have a squeaky clean record?
Look at the violations he listed and ask yourself how many of those probably apply to your own place of residence. When was the last time you had a fire inspector come and certify that your fire alarms were working? Does your house have fire sprinklers in every room? If you have a propane grill, is the tank stored up to restaurant code, or is it just stored outside on the ground? Do you have a record of when you last replaced the vent tube on your dryer? No? Oh ok. So maybe people aren't immediately in mortal danger when those codes aren't followed. And yes, there's a reason for the codes; but none of them should stand in the way of desperate people seeking shelter from the elements.
There's always more to the story. I'm not going to say the pastor is entirely blameless as it does sound like the city gave him multiple opportunities to fix violations. But when the fight is between a local government (which are notorious for anti-homeless regulations) throwing out a list of what seem like very nitpicky issues, and a guy literally just trying to give the most downtrodden people a temporary place to sleep and wash their clothes, I'm leaning toward the guy housing people being the one in the right.
-
How can a building be safe at one point of the day, but suddenly unsafe during another? That sounds like an idiotic code designed to punish exactly this.
-
In real terms, no, the risks are very low. Far lower than dying exposed in the gutter outside.
In code terms, the laws are based in safety and to keep people from slumlording.
Semi-public sleeping areas need to provide accessible beds, adequate fire alarms/suppression, and sufficient bathroom/sanitation access. Think of it like the requirements to run an actual shelter.
Ideally, this would be a temporary situation, and they'd either relocate the people to somewhere with facilities or, if they intend to run a shelter, properly convert the church.
-
-
I mean, we all know the Bible verse: "And so, the people of Bethlehem sent Joseph and the highly pregnant Mary away. They were in the right, since taking them in might have slightly inconvenienced them, and was against zoning regulations, posing a potential fire hazard"
-
-
"the sin of empathy" has been a Christian doctrine in conservative circles for a few years (at least since 2019).
Churches with universalist doctrines were supporting social change. The Christian reactionaries did their thing by organizing themselves in opposition to this change. Some particularly conservative Baptist called Rigney decided to avoid emacipatory arguments all together and attack what he saw as the pillar concept instead: empathy. 2019 https://ghostarchive.org/archive/UXWex
Also in classic reactionary style, he was cribbing off left thought. Empathy has been a target for criticism from the left going back to at least 2016. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Against_Empathy
I don't have theological opinions. But I feel like the culture I grew up in valued empathy maybe a little too much. I used to believe that people who did the horrible things lacked empathy. But that can't be a universal truth. I see people celebrating the cruelty in policies like mass deportation. You can't enjoy somebodies pain if you can't recognize it. I've also come to learn that being cruel to others can be pro-social.
-
It's tribalism plus brainwashing. They believe the right way to show empathy to the in-group is to attack anyone in the out-group. Driven by zero-sum thinking and beliefs around "natural social hierarchy" being necessary.
-
I haven't read Bloom's book, but I draw from other sources. I avoid corporate social media and its "conversations" and have been doing so quite happily for nearly 10 years.
I catch little pieces of it, like this, and it reminds me of why I stay away. I dislike the cluttered analysis and damnation or vindication of human actions and feelings sprouting all over the place; Shame, empathy, envy, anger, whatever the flavor of the month is...
Buddhist philosophy teaches us that we are aggregates of various delusions (and science has come to a similar conclusion). Spontaneous compassion, which can come from anywhere, it can't be "Rationalized," is one of the greatest tools we have for breaking patterns, of exercising a wild detachment from these aggregates, that destroy our society and ourselves.
All the tools, even the maligned ones like shame and guilt, may lead a person to these sorts of spontaneous acts of compassion, not only toward others, but toward themselves (there is ultimately no difference).
However...Of all the malign-able features of the human condition, empathy must be the strangest to hone in on.
The definition provided by Bloom is not satisfactory: The cold and detached act that arises from "imagining yourself in their place" is what some in the therapy field would call sympathy.
The being in the moment and doing what is needed in that moment is empathy, Empathy should be considered derived from compassion, it is the present choice, sympathy, the rationalized, detached choice, is the lesser guide, but of course it can lead somewhere, too.
If the empathy is missing from the effort to help than I doubt, however rationalized it may be, however well meaning the bureaucracy, NGO, or organized effort, that it will be helpful.
This is the first post on social media I have made in about 8 years that wasn't somehow related to tech support. Be merciful.
-
It really seems like they're on the verge of just accepting that they're evil but deciding that that's good
-
I'm sure somewhere in the bible, there is a line to justify the lack of empathy. Regardless of factions and sects, any religious person would not be doing what they do if it isn't prescribed in their sacred text.
-
The entire Old Testament was about a "jealous god" going around committing genocide based on perceived slights. You can find something in there to justify any horrific shit.
-
-
-
Remember that time a fake socialist was in power and locked up the real socialists‽
-
Don’t do the whole “not real Christians “ bullshit. They are Christians, these are the dregs of Christianity, it’s ugly side. Own it and fix it instead of saying “he’s not a REAL Christian” as if they’re the only problem and not the belief system itself.
-
What's the problem with the belief system? Sounds like in your eyes, the best Christianity is no Christianity.
-
Which denomination would you like me to focus on to answer this question?
And yes, frankly I think in a lot of cases no Christianity in the modern era would be better than none.
-
At its best it’s an antiquated belief system that has no real world applications in our world. It’s only good moral messages are common sense things you should already know, the rest is just filler and opinions and fictions, concocted, edited and man made books, picked by committees of old religious leaders and oligarchs. The teachings of Christianity have done nothing but fuel colonizers and monsters throughout history
-
-
Looked into the Church,
-
They should change the name of the "no true Scotsman" fallacy to "no true Christian." I swear, nobody relies on that shit more than they do.
-
Don't see you running to house them in your residence
What's that, you don't have enough space?
Now you suddenly care about being up to fire code?
How the turntables have turned
-
I know this is going to be a wildly unpopular opinion: regulations like these are written in blood. There was apparently no real effort to make the church properly habitable. People would be just as outraged (or more) if this headline was describing 18 charred bodies found in a burned down church that was REPEATEDLY told to do things the right way.
If this was anything other than performative or a malicious attempt to secure lawsuits and/or headlines, the church would have been updated, they would have secured an appropriate facility, or these people would be in the congregation's homes.
-
regulations like these are written in blood
Absolutely 100% completely. But in this case it I'm not sure the church is actually violating codes, but rather the city is using the claim as a smokescreen to punish them for helping homeless people.
This article quotes the city.
Bryan's planning and zoning administrator gave the church 10 days to stop housing people, saying it was in a zone that does not permit residential use on the first floor.
-
You're right, but people won't want to hear it. The people on the other side are right, too - it isn't better to freeze to death than it is to die from smoke inhalation. But you just don't violate fire code in public buildings, or people die. Anyone could list dozens of examples of this happening with tragic results after a basic web search.
The correct response to this situation would have been for the city government to assist the pastor in meeting the fire code, especially since he is providing a valuable public service by housing the people that nobody else wants to help.
Instead of a peaceful solution that probably would have been cheap to the taxpayer and could have been a PR bonus for the city, they chose to smack him with the letter of the law. Because people freezing to death in the streets isn't their fault, but people burning to death after the city overlooked a fire code violation would be. All they care about is their liability.
-
95 comments