Earlier this fall, I was touring the Alps in central Europe. There were countless beautiful churches.  On the side wall of one of the churches there was this saying: “We are all born human. Humanity is a choice.”

I’ve been thinking about this statement ever since.

Humanity can simply be defined as caring for and helping others whenever and wherever possible. It means helping others at times when they need that help the most. It is important as it helps us forget our selfish interests at times when others need our help.

What struck me is the clarity that humanity is not an instinct; it is a choice.  To me, it echoes a foundation of Christian faith, which is why it was painted on a church. 

As Jesus instructed, there are two Commandments above all. The first is to love God, and the second is to love your neighbor.  We have no instinct to obey these Commandments. God gives us the free will to choose.

Our recently past election was preceded by months of consideration of issues… cultural, economic, immigration and the role of the U.S. in the world. The complexity of the specifics of these issues and sorting fact from fiction was mind-numbing to me. And I think it was noise that hid the more fundamental choice.

Underlying this and all our elections is the question, “What is the role of our government?” Our common starting point is personal liberty as opposed to being subject to the whims of government.  This liberty is intended to be preserved and perpetuated by a government “of, by and for the People”.

One perspective favors minimal government, including minimal taxes and regulations. The assumption is that a free market will self-correct, consumers will drive out market cheaters and environmental abusers, and the private sector will be able to work through and address humanitarian needs.  

Often, people who embrace this philosophy contradict themselves in two ways. When a natural disaster hits, mass unemployment deprives people of income, or blight destroys a year’s crops, they expect help from their government and do not see that help as an entitlement program.

The other contradiction is that they embrace government regulation on cultural and morality issues that could be seen as fundamental to the concept of personal liberty.

The opposing perspective is that government has a much larger role ensuring human rights and humanitarian needs are met universally.  These citizens believe their government, “of, by and for the People,” has a responsibility to address social, economic and environmental injustice.  They believe their government must address human rights gaps. They believe our government should help other countries with the same needs. And they are willing to pay for such a government.

It may be seen as a contradiction that those who favor an active government to address humanitarian issues also believe the government should stay out of legislating morality in deference to the concept of personal liberty.

These “conservative” or “liberal” ideologies drive our political division. I think the test of all such ideologies is what they look like in action. It is hard to see a shred of humanity in categorizing immigration as a dangerous problem and vilifying these desperate people to the point of accusing them of eating other’s pets.  

The reality is that our economic recovery from COVID-19 has been fueled by a 3 million-plus increase in our labor pool thanks to people who are illegally here.

It is hard to see a shred of humanity in the opposition to Obamacare, which tries to provide the human right of access to healthcare to all – especially when you don’t have a better alternative plan which would accomplish the same.

It is hard to see a shred of humanity in our ongoing judgment and harassment of people who just want to be left alone to be who they are, regardless of our approval of their culture, race or sexuality.

Regular readers of this column know I have very high humanitarian expectations of our government.  

In reviewing Donald Trump’s past as a real estate developer, his actions as a wealthy socialite, his charitable contributions, his rhetoric, and his actions as president, it was clear that he accepts no personal or governmental responsibility for humanitarian needs.  

Yet we have elected him to be our next president.

On the other hand, nearly 70 million Americans voted for Kamala Harris. I believe they chose humanity. 

And at the heart of it, I believe their choice is what truly makes America great.