The 'Sin of Empathy': Public Sympathy for Lindsay Clancy Reflects Dangerous Moral Confusion
Source: M.D. Kittle. "Pastor: The 'Sin Of Empathy' Plagues Lindsay Clancy's Fangirls." August 25, 2026. thefederalist.com
The Gist
The author argues that people supporting Lindsay Clancy (who killed her three kids but claims she was suffering from postpartum psychosis) are showing a dangerous kind of misplaced sympathy that ignores the real victims and could be used to excuse terrible crimes. He connects this specific case to a broader pattern where people's tribal loyalty and one-sided compassion leads them to forget about right and wrong.
Conclusion
The public sympathy and fundraising support for Lindsay Clancy (who killed her three children) represents a dangerous form of 'untethered empathy' that has become disconnected from truth, justice, and morality, and this same sinful empathy poses a broader societal danger if allowed to excuse evil acts.
Premises
- Thousands of supporters, mostly women, are rallying for and financially supporting Clancy (over $1 million raised via GoFundMe) while portraying her primarily as a victim of postpartum psychosis and inadequate healthcare access
- These supporters rarely if ever mention or memorialize the three child victims (Cora, Dawson, and Callan) she killed
- This pattern reflects 'empathetic myopia'—supporters project themselves into Clancy's situation and their compassion becomes fixated solely on her, forgetting the actual victims
- This phenomenon is part of a broader 'tribal identity' pattern where empathy for an in-group member overrides consideration of what is true, good, and right
- This same untethered empathy pattern explains other societal ills, including a 'victimhood Olympics' culture, dismissal of unborn life, and even violence in the Middle East where in-group compassion justifies cruelty to out-groups
- If claims of psychological incapacity (like postpartum psychosis) become an accepted justification for murder, it creates a dangerous incentive structure allowing people to rationalize serious crimes by claiming diminished mental state
Assumptions
- Empathy for a defendant and empathy/justice for victims are inherently in zero-sum tension rather than compatible
- The motivations of Clancy's supporters are uniformly driven by 'untethered empathy' rather than nuanced views about mental illness, the justice system, or postpartum psychosis as a legitimate medical condition
- There is a coherent, definable line between legitimate compassion and 'sinful' empathy that the author/Rigney can reliably identify in this case
- The public reaction is representative of a broader ideological/gender-based moral decline rather than a normal, mixed public response to a tragic, complex case
- Postpartum psychosis defenses in courts are typically illegitimate or overused rather than sometimes medically valid
- The framing of supporters as a 'cult' or 'fan club' accurately characterizes their motives rather than being a rhetorically loaded mischaracterization