Subject:
|
Blank checks drawn upon the US
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 22 Apr 2004 00:46:16 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3034 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
| |
I would say that, if we are able to provide assistance, then we have an
obligation to assist those who ask for it
|
Why? Who placed this obligation on us and what was gained in exchange?
| |
or (if they are unable to ask for
it) those who do not refuse our assistance.
|
Why?
| |
Additionally, we should respect
their assessment of the help they need, rather than forcing them to accept
our estimation of that need.
|
Why? What if they are convinced that blue mud is the cure for AIDS (c.f. South
Africa right about now) when we know for sure it isn’t?
| |
Further, our offer of assistance should not be
contingent upon the recipient’s acceptance of terms antithetical to the
recipient’s values or culture.
|
Why? Why should we help those who embrace values that require our destruction,
for example.
| |
Finally, we must not use assistance to gain
leverage to force the recipient to undertake action in conflict with its own
values.
|
Why not? Why would we not act in our own enlightened self interest?
++Lar
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: George Bush has legitimised terrorism
|
| (...) I figure that you and I both know that we're getting off the initial point of the debate, so our audience may wish to tune out at this point! On what basis are you sure of that? Faith? I'm afraid that's simply insufficient for me (and in any (...) (20 years ago, 21-Apr-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
97 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
