Thursday, October 11, 2007
“Where was your concern for our low-income families then”?
This comment from a recent newspaper column took me back to a very similar thought I had while reading the editorial pages of all the local papers and finding letter after letter denouncing slots because “they are hard on/bad for the poor”. I was left sadly shaking my head at such blatantly self-serving morally objectionable behaviour.
I do mean to christen as immoral those who are concerned for those in need only when it is convenient or serves their self-interest and ignore those in need when it could inconveniently required effort or even (shudder) some small sacrifice or there is no self-interest to be served by being concerned for the well-being of the poor.
Immorality: something that is a cause or source of suffering, injury, or destruction: the social evils of poverty and injustice (American Heritage Dictionary).
Week in and week out papers were filled with letters about how bad for the poor slots would be, a vast outpouring of concern for the poor to the papers and to council. Before or after the slots debate?
Preciously.
I do mean to christen as immoral those who are concerned for those in need only when it is convenient or serves their self-interest and ignore those in need when it could inconveniently required effort or even (shudder) some small sacrifice or there is no self-interest to be served by being concerned for the well-being of the poor.
Immorality: something that is a cause or source of suffering, injury, or destruction: the social evils of poverty and injustice (American Heritage Dictionary).
Week in and week out papers were filled with letters about how bad for the poor slots would be, a vast outpouring of concern for the poor to the papers and to council. Before or after the slots debate?
Preciously.
# posted by James W Breckenridge : 12:59 AM
