The Cellar - View Single Post - SC proposes to cut funding for the disabled

Shawnee123 · 03-04-2010, 09:44 AM

That is what I was getting at, sam and pierce: those whose indignance over "paying for others' bad choices" resembles proverbial peasants with pitchforks...who decides what the bad choices are? Do we get a certain number of bad choices before we should suffer for the rest of our lives? Is our society able to let go of personal indignance over what they consider to be their money enough to help those who we don't know, whose disability is the result of what our own morals label "bad decisions" or is it only relevant when it's staring us right in our face, or only really a valid issue if the disability has nothing whatsover to do with life choices?

(The words "our" and "us" and "we" are just meant as catch-all pronouns...we all have differing views on the subject.)

We can walk over the homeless, certainly many of them made a bad choice with drugs or drinking or the stock market. We can turn our head away from the mentally ill. We can say "get a job." We can compartmentalize other people's issues because we believe it's all their own damn fault and they need to pull themselves up by the bootstraps. It's a different issue when it hits close to home, and we have to start considering what society's role is, or should be.

I don't expect answers to hard questions, but perhaps we'll see a bit of self-examination from indignant taxpayers.

And surely, there are people with entitlement mentality...but at what cost to the truly in need do we start deciding who is deserving and who is not, based upon only OUR OWN life experiences?

03-04-2010, 09:44 AM	#25
Shawnee123 Why, you're a regular Alfred E Einstein, ain't ya? Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 21,206	That is what I was getting at, sam and pierce: those whose indignance over "paying for others' bad choices" resembles proverbial peasants with pitchforks...who decides what the bad choices are? Do we get a certain number of bad choices before we should suffer for the rest of our lives? Is our society able to let go of personal indignance over what they consider to be their money enough to help those who we don't know, whose disability is the result of what our own morals label "bad decisions" or is it only relevant when it's staring us right in our face, or only really a valid issue if the disability has nothing whatsover to do with life choices? (The words "our" and "us" and "we" are just meant as catch-all pronouns...we all have differing views on the subject.) We can walk over the homeless, certainly many of them made a bad choice with drugs or drinking or the stock market. We can turn our head away from the mentally ill. We can say "get a job." We can compartmentalize other people's issues because we believe it's all their own damn fault and they need to pull themselves up by the bootstraps. It's a different issue when it hits close to home, and we have to start considering what society's role is, or should be. I don't expect answers to hard questions, but perhaps we'll see a bit of self-examination from indignant taxpayers. And surely, there are people with entitlement mentality...but at what cost to the truly in need do we start deciding who is deserving and who is not, based upon only OUR OWN life experiences? __________________ A word to the wise ain't necessary - it's the stupid ones who need the advice. --Bill Cosby Last edited by Shawnee123; 03-04-2010 at 09:49 AM.