Blue-Tinted Blindness: When ‘Love’ Becomes Political Cover

How Geoff Duncan’s Shift to Democrat Compassion Leaves Women and Children in Harm’s Way

Former Georgia Lt. Governor Geoff Duncan wants credit for switching political parties in the name of moral clarity. In his recent opinon piece, "From Republican Lt. Governor to Democrat: Loving my neighbor is easier now," Duncan frames his transition as an act of conscience, centered around the vague yet fashionable commandment to "love thy neighbor." But as a Southern woman and a radical feminist who’s been burned by both parties, I find his version of compassion deeply selective—and in many ways, dangerous.

Duncan writes with pride about expanding Medicaid and crafting policy that helps the uninsured, claiming this is how we "love our neighbors at scale." But he never mentions what that funding is increasingly being used for. Under both Republican and Democrat leadership, Medicaid and Medicare have funded so-called "gender-affirming care"—including puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and surgeries—for both adults and minors across at least 25 states and D.C. That includes double mastectomies on teenage girls and hormone regimens that damage fertility and carry lifelong health risks.

In Georgia, following a 2022 federal court settlement reached under Attorney General Chris Carr (now a 2026 Republican gubernatorial candidate), the state was required to remove its exclusions on gender-related care from its Medicaid plan. As a result, taxpayers are now subsidizing procedures that many recognize as medically unnecessary and ethically indefensible. Where is the moral outrage for the young girls who harmed by irreversible medicalization? Where is the compassion for detransitioned women left with permanent physical trauma and no support system?

You can’t claim moral superiority for expanding public insurance while refusing to scrutinize what it pays for. That’s abdication of responsibility, not “love for thy neighbor”.

Duncan’s refusal to confront the darker consequences of policies his party supports reveals a pattern: when women and children are harmed, their suffering is conveniently omitted from the political narrative. Whether through healthcare or immigration, his moral compass doesn’t point to the vulnerable—it points to the applause.

Duncan also makes an emotional pitch for immigration reform, painting undocumented immigrants as hardworking neighbors just trying to survive. He supports a "pathway to citizenship" for nearly all, regardless of how they arrived. But this kind of blind moralizing comes at a cost—and too often, it’s women and children who pay with their lives.

Seven-year-old Ivory Smith in Texas was murdered by a drunk-driving illegal immigrant who had been released from an ICE detainer only months earlier. Larisha Sharell Thompson, a South Carolina mother of two, was shot to death by a group of six undocumented teenagers and young adults, some already with a previous violent criminal record. And here in Georgia, nursing student Laken Riley was killed while jogging on a college campus—her killer, an illegal immigrant from Venezuela, had previously been arrested and released. These women were not political abstractions—they were daughters, sisters, and mothers whose lives were cut short by individuals who should not have been in this country to begin with. What does Duncan say to their families? What kind of love allows strangers to break the law and reap rewards, while law-abiding citizens get buried?

There’s nothing noble about policies that leave your actual neighbors—gender-confused children, little girls riding in cars with their mom, working mothers out to celebrate the weekend, or students jogging before class—more vulnerable to harm. If love has no asterisk, as Duncan claims, then why does it seem to exclude the women whose safety gets traded away for political posturing?

Real love requires discernment. Real public service means protecting the vulnerable, not virtue-signaling at their expense. If Duncan’s moral awakening ignores the girls sterilized by taxpayer-funded medicine or the women murdered by men shielded under sanctuary policies, then maybe it's not love he's found. Maybe it’s just a more socially acceptable form of cowardice dressed in blue. If this is what love looks like in politics, then women have every right to be wary.