response to the articles

I think the comment made by Wolff in the first article was really chilling: something about how anyone who has been born into an affluent, not-starving family is just lucky. And I agree with whoever said that being born into such a family presents those lucky people with a duty. A duty to realize that we cant always apply our reasoning or circumstances to these sorts of decisions...yes, maybe people should get their acts together and work on birth control and stuff but REALLY!!! I guess I can understand how people say that large families are just asking for it. But I cant believe that! Its easy to say, from our perspective, These people are pathetic and lazy and lacking in personal responsibility. But thats a pretty wide judgment to make and I think there are people who have ended up killing off their kids in Haiti from no fault of their own. So isnt it better to risk helping some bums and provide aid to the people who really need it? And give them the benefit of the doubt that not all these large families are the result of carelessness or manipulation or laziness? I mean, yeah longterm we need to teach them to fish I guess. But whos gonna be left to learn if we dont just assume they were acting in their own best interest and help them out? Its kinda like giving money to those people downtown who I just know are going to use it for cigarettes and stuff which is totally lame but do I need the money all that desperately??NO!! I dont think thats naive. They might as well have it to spend it however they want and thats not really helping them (---1.theyre using it in a bad way 2.they wont get any food or anything from it 3.it doesnt teach them to work for themselves) but I think that everyone should get the right to have some money!!! (argh that is kinda naive and pretty scarily liberal but Im not all sorted out on my moral beliefs?!?!?!) I guess that is a stretch and not quite part of the "duty" We All Have To Less Fortunate People and stuff but sorta same idea.

SO Im not sure that makes any sense but to kind of sum it up.... We can sit here and say that these people should have made more informed decisions but I really dont think anyone who hasnt been in that situation has that right. We have a duty to realize that our sorts of reasoning dont always extend to their situations. (---flashback to our "best convo of the year" that one day in class---)

And then...the third article about the UN ceiling. I forget who said in class that its all about how it was TAXPAYER money, but I think that really is the key thing there. And how Jill said that it was assigned to be used for a certain thing and then wasnt used for that certain purpose. So if youre gonna push a load of tax money into a pot called Relief and then go paint a ceiling with it, youre taking something (rights??) away from the taxpayers and the people who were originally going to get relief, whether or not they depended on it. SO, not fair.

So I BELIEVE that before you call the shots on somebody who is starving and choosing children in Haiti, you go live in Haiti and see how you feel. Until then, we might as well help them out. And eventually teach them to fish.