Compassion has no place in the courtroom. At least, that’s what a rogue group of atheists joined by a number of left-leaning commentators have argued, the result being a formal complaint filed against the Dallas judge who dared to show kindness to the woman she sentenced to prison.
The controversy started last week when Judge Tammy Kemp sentenced Amber Guyger, a former Dallas cop, to 10 years in prison after she mistakenly entered the apartment of a young black man, Botham Jean, shot him, and then failed to resuscitate him.
After the sentencing, Kemp stepped down from the bench, handed Guyger a Bible, and encouraged her to find peace. Because this act of kindness was out of line with proper judicial protocol, the atheist organization Freedom From Religion Foundation filed a complaint against Kemp with the Texas State Commission on Judicial Conduct. But the group’s complaint against Kemp had nothing to do with proper procedure and everything to do with the Bible in Kemp’s hands.
It’s for that reason Kemp is right not to back down: “Following my own convictions, I could not refuse that woman a hug. I would not,” Kemp told the Associated Press. “And I don’t understand the anger. And I guess I could say if you profess religious beliefs and you are going to follow them, I would hope that they not be situational and limited to one race only.”
But quite a few of Kemp’s critics do indeed suffer from situational compassion. That seems to be the case with Atlantic columnist Jemele Hill, whose real grievance with Kemp was that she, a black woman, broke proper protocol and hugged Guyger, a white woman, who had shot and killed a black man. To Hill, Guyger is a racist murderer who deserved justice not mercy. Thanks to Kemp (and Botham Jean’s brother, Brandt Jean), Guyger received both.
Hill is a serial race-baiter who has become so convinced she is right that she’s constructed an entire worldview to support the narrative that white people innately have it out for blacks. Take, for example, her recent call for self-inflicted segregation on college campuses. There’s no nuance with Hill. There’s only political stubbornness of a kind so unflinching that she’s willing to encourage division over reconciliation, and bitterness over compassion.
Luckily, Hill’s narrative didn’t win the day last week. Brandt Jean’s did. He took to the stand and offered Guyger his love and forgiveness not because she deserved it, but because it was “what Botham would have wanted.” Tammy Kemp followed suit because she’s seen what happens to people in prison. Depression and bitterness eat at their hearts until there’s nothing left, she explained, and that’s not what she wanted for Guyger, or for any convict.
Instead of instinctually drawing up the racial battle lines, Hill should learn from the examples of Brandt Jean and Kemp. To live life with purpose and compassion for everyone, even those who have committed egregious wrongs, is an admirable goal and one Kemp should not apologize for — no matter what Hill says or how many complaints are filed against her.
Kemp understood in that courtroom that she had a choice between judicial protocol and the right thing to do. We should be thankful she chose the latter.
