Amazon.com Widgets

When inhabitants of a war-torn country such as South Sudan are surviving on goat bones and water lilies, are we compelled to step in with aid?

When inhabitants of a war-torn country such as South Sudan are surviving on goat bones and water lilies, are we compelled to step in with aid?
  • How can we not?

    From a purely human standpoint, how can we see fellow humans suffering and starving and not feel compelled to help. Especially in developed countries, where there are charitable aid structures in place and food pantries or other organizations which already help to feed the hungry, it's not such a huge stretch to help them.

  • Yes, we should help

    If the living conditions in places such as South Sudan are this bad, then I believe others are obligated to provide what aid they can. We should provide aid as long as the people in these areas actually want relief though. I see no reason to not help these people.

  • Yes, we should be.

    We would want them to help us if all we had was goat bones and water lillies or whatever the equivalent would be in our country. Not only that, but it shows basic human compassion to want to help people who are in such dire need. Not wanting to help them is a weakness.

  • We are the richest country on earth

    There is no doubt that we have problems at home to fix, but we can help people in most war-torn country with pennies compared to what supplies, food, water and other life-saving materials cost in those countries. If we feel compelled to get involved in others' wars, we should feel compelled to help victims of war.

  • No responses have been submitted.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.