Can you have compassion for someone yet still hold them responsible?

[ronandannette]

I believe that people should be held somewhat responsible for their particular situation in life and that if you hold them accountable, you can still feel sorry for them, you can still feel a want to help them.

But it would appear that holding that view makes me a monster even though the vast majority agree with me.

Confusing.

Here's the thing - you (or I) don't hold them accountable. That's entirely the wrong use of the word. They bear the consequences of their own choices regardless of what anybody else thinks - that's accountability. The subtext to your poll questions isn't accountability, it's whether or not others think the afflicted "had it coming". Whether or not that elicits sympathy, empathy or compassion, well, I guess some are softer-hearted than others.

I suspect that is due in LARGE portion to the fact that many answered the poll before reading your examples and realized that your poll question isn't really illustrating what you're trying to derive based on your examples.

 

[GreatLakes]

I'd love to know too where you can live that would be immune to natural disasters. As we are blaming people for living too close to the water. We had a tornado come thru 3 years ago. Maybe I should have packed up and moved--where exactly???? Because apparently if it happens again it is my fault.

Oh, and we are close enough to Lake Michigan to get lake effect snow storms. Guess when we get snowed in that is my fault too.

I don't think anyone can really be immune to natural disasters, especially with the current changing climate. I will say however that there are places people shouldn't live. If you need huge pumps running 24 hours a day to keep your land dry you are in a place people shouldn't be living. If you have to have levies and flood walls to keep your land dry you are in a place people shouldn't be living. If fresh water has to be piped in from hundreds of miles away you are in a place people shouldn't be living. We as a species feel we can just live anywhere when that isn't realistic and it will bite us hard in the future.

I do feel bad for individuals when they live somewhere that used to be safe to live but isn't any longer but I don't really feel all that bad when they live somewhere we, as a species, shouldn't be and they pay the price. The hubris of mankind will speed our demise.

 

[luvsJack]

I don't think anyone can really be immune to natural disasters, especially with the current changing climate. I will say however that there are places people shouldn't live. If you need huge pumps running 24 hours a day to keep your land dry you are in a place people shouldn't be living. If you have to have levies and flood walls to keep your land dry you are in a place people shouldn't be living. If fresh water has to be piped in from hundreds of miles away you are in a place people shouldn't be living. We as a species feel we can just live anywhere when that isn't realistic and it will bite us hard in the future.

I do feel bad for individuals when they live somewhere that used to be safe to live but isn't any longer but I don't really feel all that bad when they live somewhere we, as a species, shouldn't be and they pay the price. The hubris of mankind will speed our demise.

Not sure where all you may be referring too but the levies makes me think of NOLA. To be fair, the reason the levies broke is that they weren’t maintained the way they were supposed to be. The people of that great city, trusted their officials and it wasn’t done.

I mean I get what you are saying. Just saying, I am fairly sure most of the people there though they were safe. I hope and pray that now they are.

 

[GreatLakes]

Not sure where all you may be referring too but the levies makes me think of NOLA. To be fair, the reason the levies broke is that they weren’t maintained the way they were supposed to be. The people of that great city, trusted their officials and it wasn’t done.

I mean I get what you are saying. Just saying, I am fairly sure most of the people there though they were safe. I hope and pray that now they are.

NOLA, much of the southern FL panhandle that has been "drained", large parts of California. These are areas that people just shouldn't live and especially not in the numbers they do. We like to think, as a species not necessarily individuals, that every place on the planet is ours but when you require billions of dollars of engineering just to make an area inhabitable you are living in a place you just shouldn't. Rivers shouldn't run dry because their flow has been diverted to provide water for a hundred million people spread across multiple states.

 

[skyblue17]

I'd love to know too where you can live that would be immune to natural disasters. As we are blaming people for living too close to the water. We had a tornado come thru 3 years ago. Maybe I should have packed up and moved--where exactly???? Because apparently if it happens again it is my fault.

Oh, and we are close enough to Lake Michigan to get lake effect snow storms. Guess when we get snowed in that is my fault too.

My hometown was recently struck by a tornado. It has taken months for people to get on their feet. My parents lived with a massive crack in their roof all summer and were relieved to have it repaired before possible snowfall.

Oh, and this was in CONNECTICUT.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Not sure where all you may be referring too but the levies makes me think of NOLA. To be fair, the reason the levies broke is that they weren’t maintained the way they were supposed to be. The people of that great city, trusted their officials and it wasn’t done.

I mean I get what you are saying. Just saying, I am fairly sure most of the people there though they were safe. I hope and pray that now they are.

Water went over the levies here during the 1951 flood. It happens. It led to life-altering changes between stockyards being ruined and never coming back, it ultimately led to the relocation of what would become our airport, etc. Oh there's still low-lying areas here that consistently get flooded when enough water occurs--businesses impacted and whatnot. But they did learn some things as what measures they took helped when the 1993 flood occurred. Tornadoes are a way of life here and we have felt earthquakes though none have been that close to us, etc.

On the other hand I do get what the poster is saying..to an extent.. You've got the fire chief in CA strongly recommending that people not be allowed to build in high risk areas--it didn't work as a 19,000 home area was approved in a high and very high fire zone. Even with some measures to help that's when a fire has already occurred rather than keeping people out of those areas.

IDK I don't think it's an all or nothing thing. I live here in an area with risks too. But I do think there are just some areas that straddle the line of "should we really be here" and in that sense as climates change and adjust that's a moving target.

 

[Cannot_Wait_4Disney]

NOLA, much of the southern FL panhandle that has been "drained", large parts of California. These are areas that people just shouldn't live and especially not in the numbers they do. We like to think, as a species not necessarily individuals, that every place on the planet is ours but when you require billions of dollars of engineering just to make an area inhabitable you are living in a place you just shouldn't. Rivers shouldn't run dry because their flow has been diverted to provide water for a hundred million people spread across multiple states.

Of the water actually used by humans, the millions of people you speak of in California use just 20% of the water. Agriculture which provides fruit and veggies to the entire United States plus some foreign countries takes 80% So. In fact the water can carry the population out there. What it soon will not be able to carry any more is some of the more water intensive crops a lot of which go for export. Unfortunately some of the places where some of these water intensive crops grow, the soil is useful for little else. So, we're going to have to find a way to water these crops that doesn't use so much water.

 

[LovesTimone]

It would appear that many believe that having compassion for someone or their situation is mutually exclusive from also holding them somewhat responsible.

Here are some examples:

1. A worker who has no savings at all who is furloughed or let go.
2. Someone who lives beside a river known to flood who's home is destroyed in a flood.
3. Someone who comes down with lung cancer after working 30 years as a bartender.
4. A homeowner who needs a new roof but has no money set aside for the roof.
5. Someone who needs a new transmission but once again has no money set aside for repair.
6. Someone who's home is destroyed by a hurricane that lives 5 miles or less from the coast of Florida.
7. Someone who is living a lifestyle beyond their income.

You never know what is really going on in someone else life, unless you walk in their shoes....

A worker who has no savings at all who is furloughed or let go, A homeowner who needs a new roof but has no money set aside for the roof. Someone who needs a new transmission but once again has no money set aside for repair. There are people - alot of people that live pay check to pay check just to survive...there is nothing left to save for when you are trying to keep everything going... a roof over your head, the lights on, food on the table...

Someone who comes down with lung cancer after working 30 years as a bartender. Maybe that's the only job that they could get, and it paid well so that they could take care of their family...

Someone who's home is destroyed by a hurricane that lives 5 miles or less from the coast of Florida. - I live in Florida... and in the center of the state... you see the news that show the devastation on the coast because that where they come on at... that sells the news, make career's for some of those weather reporters... What about all the homes that are destroyed in the middle of the state...are we all living irresponsibly ?... some ones gotta live here who else is going to work at Disney, Universal, man the beaches, hotels, restaurants...

Hurricanes, Tornado's, Sink holes, Fires, Earth quakes, Tsunami, Flooding, Volcano erupting,- These are act's of mother Nature/acts of God...with the exception that fires that can be set by man...

It seems you are more standing in judgement of others that rather than having compassion for any of these...

 

[Boardwalk Jedi]

My hometown was recently struck by a tornado. It has taken months for people to get on their feet. My parents lived with a massive crack in their roof all summer and were relieved to have it repaired before possible snowfall.

Oh, and this was in CONNECTICUT.

Yup. My town looked like a war zone for a week. We're a hilly area that hasn't seen a "real" tornado ever. But somehow we managed to get one that hit all the right spots.

 

[luvsJack]

Water went over the levies here during the 1951 flood. It happens. It led to life-altering changes between stockyards being ruined and never coming back, it ultimately led to the relocation of what would become our airport, etc. Oh there's still low-lying areas here that consistently get flooded when enough water occurs--businesses impacted and whatnot. But they did learn some things as what measures they took helped when the 1993 flood occurred. Tornadoes are a way of life here and we have felt earthquakes though none have been that close to us, etc.

On the other hand I do get what the poster is saying..to an extent.. You've got the fire chief in CA strongly recommending that people not be allowed to build in high risk areas--it didn't work as a 19,000 home area was approved in a high and very high fire zone. Even with some measures to help that's when a fire has already occurred rather than keeping people out of those areas.

IDK I don't think it's an all or nothing thing. I live here in an area with risks too. But I do think there are just some areas that straddle the line of "should we really be here" and in that sense as climates change and adjust that's a moving target.

Oh, I get what he is saying. And I don’t totally disagree especially if talking about new homes being built like those in CA.

I was just pointing out that for NOLA, there were officials that were supposed to make it safe and they didn’t.

For most places, well we are here now so I don’t think we should just dismiss those struck by tragedy with “well, you shouldn’t live there”.

I had a bit of that thought process at one point and would have never chosen to live in the coast. And then Katrina struck. Being on the coast was bad but there were places hit almost as hard over 60 miles inland. Florida has been hit with storms just as destructive. No where is really immune.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

I was taught compassion in the form of, "There but by the grace of God, go I", and I teach my kids the same.

 

[kdonnel]

There are people - alot of people that live pay check to pay check just to survive...there is nothing left to save for when you are trying to keep everything going... a roof over your head, the lights on, food on the table...

People seem to be twisting my belief that you should prepare and be held accountable if you don't for a complete lack of understanding.

It is a fact that many of those currently effected by the shutdown could be much better prepared having been taught better money management skills.

The majority of government workers are the middle class, they are not living below the poverty line, but many are living above their middle class means.

Why? Because they have not been taught the skills necessary to properly manage money.

http://press.careerbuilder.com/2017...Workers-According-to-New-CareerBuilder-Survey
A lot of people is 78% of people in America live pay check to pay check.

ONE way to start solving that problem is to start teaching people how to manage their money. Schools need to teach more real life money management skills. How to set a budget, how to stick to that budget, how to balance a checking account, etc. That is not the only way the problem will be solved but it will certainly help.

Poor money management skills are not limited to those living in poverty. From the article I linked:

Nearly one in 10 workers making $100,000+ live paycheck to paycheck, twenty-eight percent of workers making $50,000-$99,999 usually or always live paycheck to paycheck

Sure some of them will have extenuating circumstances but for the majority, they just suck at managing their money.

From the same survey:

Still, despite financial woes, there are certain things employees aren't willing to give up. When asked what they'd absolutely not give up, regardless of financial concerns, employees cited:

• Internet connection: 54 percent
• Mobile device (smart phone, tablet, etc.): 53 percent
• Driving: 48 percent
• Pets: 37 percent
• Cable: 21 percent
• Going out to eat: 19 percent
• Traveling: 17 percent
• Education: 13 percent
• Buying gifts for people: 13 percent
• Alcohol: 11 percent

The average American does not have the skills necessary to properly set a budget and stick to it. I think that is a shame and that the education system should tackle the problem.

That does not mean I don't have empathy for those suffering.[/QUOTE]

 

[sk!mom]

You seem to be reading an awful lot into a few words posted on the internet.

But it does seem that I value personal responsibility much higher then many on this message board.

For your sake, i hope karma never decides to teach you true compassion. I will warn that karma often seems to teach us that compassion through the struggles of our loved ones.

Not gone the way I expected?

The votes are definitely opposite of what I would have expected.

At this point over 90% of people believe the same as I do yet seem to think they don't.

Very confusing.

As to your original question, our circumstances hold us responsible whether we deserve it or not. If those around us are compassionate it hopefully makes the situation easier.

As an example, I know someone who lost a job right before Christmas. I have no idea if it was their "fault" as absolutely nothing would be accomplished through that train of thought. I tried to be an encouraging supporter as they weathered that difficulty. Thankfully they start a new job tomorrow and our relationship is stronger than ever because I was compassionate toward them.

 

[siren0119]

As to your original question, our circumstances hold us responsible whether we deserve it or not. If those around us our compassionate it hopefully makes the situation easier.

As an example, I know someone who lost a job right before Christmas. I have no idea if it was their "fault" as absolutely nothing would be accomplished through that train of thought. I tried to be an encouraging supporter as they weathered that difficulty. Thankfully they start a new job tomorrow and our relationship is stronger than ever because I was compassionate toward them.

THIS, a thousand times.

Whether or not someone has prepared in advance for tragedy/difficulty is irrelevant to whether or not one should show them compassion when they suffer. Perhaps building the relationship through compassion will open the door for a learning opportunity and the person suffering will pick up some valuable tools to help them weather the storms better - but that will NEVER happen if the prevailing attitude is "you should have prepared better and didn't learn the skills you should have".

Compassion and empathy are meeting people where they are, not bereating them for where you THINK they should be.

 

[maxiesmom]

THIS, a thousand times.

Whether or not someone has prepared in advance for tragedy/difficulty is irrelevant to whether or not one should show them compassion when they suffer. Perhaps building the relationship through compassion will open the door for a learning opportunity and the person suffering will pick up some valuable tools to help them weather the storms better - but that will NEVER happen if the prevailing attitude is "you should have prepared better and didn't learn the skills you should have".

Compassion and empathy are meeting people where they are, not bereating them for where you THINK they should be.

 

[EveDallas]

For your sake, i hope karma never decides to teach you true compassion. I will warn that karma often seems to teach us that compassion through the struggles of our loved ones.

Karma is a you-know-what. The OP is asking for it in spades.

 

[kdonnel]

For your sake, i hope karma never decides to teach you true compassion. I will warn that karma often seems to teach us that compassion through the struggles of our loved ones.

I was homeless for 7 weeks when I was 10.

Why? Because my parents were really bad at managing their money.

I have had struggles but that is not a necessary requirement to believe that people generally are responsible for their economic preparedness.

 

[Boardwalk Jedi]

I was homeless for 7 weeks when I was 10.

Why? Because my parents were really bad at managing their money.

I have had struggles but that is not a necessary requirement to believe that people generally are responsible for their economic preparedness.

You must really hate the ending of It's A Wonderful Life.

 

[underdesea]

You must really hate the ending of It's A Wonderful Life.

Looks like someone's regular Sunday morning routine is completed and they couldn't wait to get right back to the blame game.

 

[mjkacmom]

I was homeless for 7 weeks when I was 10.

Why? Because my parents were really bad at managing their money.

I have had struggles but that is not a necessary requirement to believe that people generally are responsible for their economic preparedness.

I know people with really bad financial difficulties, due to outside circumstances, that thankfully my family never had to deal with, they tried to do everything right, but non-preventable issues made their lives unfortunate. So you see, you can try to be a responsible human being, but at any time, things can go bad.