At Tikkun Magazine, Eileen Flanagan argues that “seeing more authority than empathy in the divine, or vice versa, affects the way we act politically”:
George Lakoff, a Professor of Cognitive Science and Linguistics who has written for Tikkun about the importance of “framing” issues, has described “the politics of authority” and “the politics of empathy” as competing moral systems that co-exist within most of us, though we may tend toward one or another. An authority mindset values self-discipline, obedience, and personal responsibility, while an empathy mindset values caring for one’s neighbor, whether through personal charity or government programs. A sick woman without a green card is an “illegal alien” who deserves what she gets, or she is the very “least of these” that Jesus instructed his followers to care for, depending on how you think about morality.
These contrasting moral visions often correspond to differing images of God. According to Lakoff, those who believe in a distant, judging father are more likely to want a distant government that enforces certain basic rules and doesn’t bail out those who have been unsuccessful in what is presumed to be a meritocracy. If you don’t have insurance, this model asserts, you probably aren’t worthy. Those who try to help the “illegal alien” are themselves subverting the divine order, which may help explain why the issue of health care for people in the US illegally has incited such wrath in conservatives. In contrast, those who believe in a benevolent, less patriarchal Creator are more likely to be motivated by compassion and empathy, willing to care for any people, as they believe God cares for them. These findings are confirmed by Catholic priest and sociologist Andrew Greeley, who has found that having a more loving, compassionate image of the Divine makes people more likely to vote Democratic, even after adjusting for other factors, like age, gender, and education level.
Read the full piece here.