Discussion on Toxic Empathy

Allie Beth Stuckey recently had an open conversation with New York Times columnist David French about “toxic empathy,” a term she explores in her book. In the discussion, Stuckey challenged French for misrepresenting her views, particularly regarding how certain Christians aligned with Donald Trump are supposedly undermining empathy.

French expressed his view that a lack of empathy has caused issues, emphasizing that empathy should be more comprehensive. He argued that the current state of empathy is overly selective and partisan, stating, “one of our big problems… is that ‘all that really matters is the experience of your allies.’

Referring to some Christians in the MAGA movement, he described the dismissal of empathy for human suffering as a “cultural phenomenon,” pushing instead for a more nuanced understanding of empathy. Stuckey retorted that this selective empathy can lead to immoral choices, which she deems a form of toxic empathy.

In her argument, Stuckey highlighted the importance of considering both sides of the narrative. “I tell both sides of the story… I’m doing what you say you should do, which is extending compassion,” she stated, adding that stopping at just one perspective “paralyzes us from actually making the right moral decisions.” She urged Christians to ask insightful questions about what is true from various perspectives, including biblical, moral, political, logical, and historical truths.

Stuckey also pointed to specific moments in their conversation where French seemed to agree with her, noting a discrepancy between his agreement and his article’s portrayal. She cited a specific instance from 2025 where he suggested that discussing children’s suffering in response to changes in foreign aid reflected harmful empathy. Stuckey disagreed, clarifying that this isn’t what she considers toxic empathy.

French acknowledged the complexity of public discourse around empathy, explaining that discussions often frame empathy as a negative trait. He agreed that many Christians have become quick to label expressions of concern about human suffering as toxic empathy.

During their exchange, the two touched on various subjects, such as gender, abortion, and political support for different candidates. Notably, French argued for voting for Kamala Harris in the upcoming election, pointing to statistics showing a decline in abortions during the Obama years compared to Trump’s administration.

This notion sparked criticism from others in the media, suggesting that the decline in abortion rates was more correlated with stricter regulations in red states during Obama’s presidency than with any emotional appeal made by his administration.

Overall, the discussion highlighted the intricacies of empathy within political and social contexts, as well as differing views on pro-life ethics and the implications of various ideologies on moral decision-making.