>>Just human compassion, which you seem short of at the moment.
>>
>>Oh, I have plenty of compassion. I had lots of compassion for my best friend when she lost her struggle with breast cancer. And I had lots of compassion for my father when his problems became so insurmountable that the only way that he found to deal with them was by hanging himself in our garage. I also have loads of compassion for all the people that they left behind.
>>
>>Kinda puts things into perspective, doesn't it?
>
>Not at all. And again you're applying a dirty tactic, a debate trick in this case.

Compassion has many definitions. In this case, I think you do a disservice to someone by pandering to their limitations. those protected as such, who have the capability of growing and learning, are not being treated compassionately; they are being made servile and subservient.

Compassion, IMHO, is to teach the person to suck it up, become stronger, realize that you let go what you can't handle, don't blame things on everyone else and accept responsibility for your actions; by learning and growing, you become stronger. Then there's the liberal's compassion: oh, you don't want to work? OK, here's food stamps, public transportation on call, free medical care, free counseling, free legal care, etc...ad nauseum... We realize you're less competent, less fortunate and its not your fault. We'll take good care of you. Everybody else, you have to recognize that they are less fortunate, so you can't say anything that would hurt their feelings, make them feel less fortunate or trouble their psyche. What a crock!