Conscience Conservatism: Because 'Compassion' Alone Is Not Enough

Moreover, the phrase that is often used to describe his brand of politics is "compassionate conservatism," which resonates well in today's political climate, particularly as Americans start focusing more of their attention on domestic politics after our victory in Iraq.

But it is also one that initially raised doubt on the conservative side. Certainly, the Education Bill is one example in which there was too much "compassion" rather than conservatism when it came to appropriating money.

However, the president and first lady Laura Bush are to be commended for their frequent visits to schools to tell children about the importance of education.

No doubt this plays well with suburbanites, who can feel assured that we have a president who cares. But the Bushes are going to places where conservatives need to be seen more often, and the message that they deliver is one that needs to be sounded more often in our society.

There is an important question, though, that begs asking, particularly by social conservatives, given that it is our movement that can provide the moral compass that can lead our country to rediscover the values that served us well in the past and can do so in the future.

That question is this: Is compassion enough?

Think of our country that we live in now and think of what life was like 50 years ago.

Frank Sinatra may have made the hair of many parents stand on edge, but his style would strike many of today's young people as being downright vanilla compared to the heavy metal and rap stars of today who inject violence and sex into their work and their own public lives.

The movies adhered to a moral code and churches mobilized their memberships against those works considered to be indecent. Even liberals believed in God, and while sports and movie stars did not lead perfect lives, they were expected to conduct themselves as ladies and gentlemen in public.

Las Vegas was still a pretty small town then. It had not yet become the capital of a huge, multimillion-dollar gambling industry that is drawing more and more Americans into a destructive habit.

Compassion was certainly present in life back then too, particularly on a neighborly basis. Communities like the one where I grew up back in Racine, Wisc., were much stronger, as were institutions such as the church and civic and fraternal organizations like the Knights of Columbus and the Elks. But that compassion was buttressed by a stronger sense of right and wrong that was prevalent throughout American society.

Now compassion is often presented as just writing a check, particularly by our liberal opposition who have had the federal government dole out billions upon billions of dollars indiscriminately in the name of compassion. The president deserves our thanks for his hard work in highlighting the work of volunteers, who make their contributions in sweat and time, showing us that true compassion cannot be measured by the amount of the check.

But the compassion that President Bush likes to promote, a genuine kind-heartedness, is only one definition of the word. People need to realize that compassion can lead people astray too.

Compassion for predatory priests led church officials to overlook compassion for the victims of their sexual abuse. Compassion for homosexuals means overlooking the sinful activities that have greatly contributed to the spread of sexually transmitted diseases including AIDS. Compassion for the poor led lawmakers to let our welfare system become a trap that perpetuated poverty for millions of Americans.

Therefore, compassion is only one quality that we need to make our society function properly, and that desire to be generous and kind means little unless it is accompanied by a force of tougher, sterner stuff that can enable us to make discerning, stern, but ultimately fair and moral judgments.

Furthermore, compassion in today's society is usually reserved for the poor, but we need to realize that there is a values deficit in this country, and it is present in not just our poorest households but also some of our most affluent.

That deficit may be most glaring in the minds of many members of our younger generations who take to heart the lyrics of the songs of Madonna or Eminem in the way that we do the Psalms.

If social conservatism is to truly lead our country, then we must offer more than compassion. We need to reinvigorate the conscience of all Americans to help them to rediscover that sense of right and wrong and the true right choices to make in life. This is something that is too important to be left to Hollywood actors or rock stars or authors of books about self-esteem.

A conservatism based on the conscience can lead individuals to realize that traditional values are still the best values. It can play a vital role in helping those institutions, such as the church, that need to recover their moral bearings.

If we work to reform or even to supplant those institutions that have become corrupt, then we will have gone a long way toward reinstilling faith in traditional values and the American way.

If we work to clean up our entertainment, we will have gone even further to help Judeo-Christian morality take hold once more in our society.

Compassion has an important role to play in American life. But when guided by a conservatism of the conscience, the two can develop a synergy that can bring about even more beneficial changes to our society. The two are complementary, and the president's support for pro-life measures and abstinence education are examples of where his compassion is undergirded by that strong sense of what is morally right.

Certainly, compassion cannot be blamed for the failure of our corporations and even the federal government to adhere to strict accounting standards that provide the truth to the stockholder and the taxpayer. However, unless we take decisive action soon, think of the surprise that will await many younger citizens on the day the Social Security System's house of cards comes crashing down.

If the lawmakers of our government and the managers of businesses possessed strongly developed consciences that respected the difference between right and wrong enough to take action, then they would stop such malfeasance without hesitation.

In the late 1970s and the 1980s, we were fighting to preserve the integrity of the family and the central role that traditional values played in American life. We lost that battle, and it was a polarizing one.

We need to realize that today our task is to promote the application of Judeo-Christian principles in today's society. It means separating ourselves from the contemporary culture while throwing a life preserver to those immersed in the cultural cesspool who are struggling to retain their sense of decency and integrity and morality.

It means reaching out to the disaffected and demonstrating that the so-called traditional values are functional values that work and are just as relevant today as they were in the days of your grandparents.

Conscience conservatism will not be an easy message to communicate, so careful thought needs to be given to new strategies and tactics directed at those who need to see our hand reaching out to them. Many of the people we need to reach share our commitment to Judeo-Christian values but felt ignored by us in the past or we felt they ignored us.

If we continue to leave each other alone, we will both lose. Together, in the America of the 21st Century, we can do much good.

Is the conservative movement of today up to the challenge?

Let's hope so, for the sake of our nation.