Social services: Who deserves the benefits?
Sam Chenkin
Issue date: 10/26/07 Section: Ed-Op
- < prev Page 2 of 2
Should we give this man access to healthcare, food, and shelter? Should our judicial system respect his rights or prosecute his murderer? Should our police protect him? Should our firefighters keep him from burning alive if his house catches on fire? Most of you (I desperately hope) probably answered yes to at least the second two questions. Many of you probably even believe he shouldn't be allowed to starve or die of exposure. Why not?
And here we have finally arrived at our destination. We have entered the murky, confusing, poisonous, and scintillating waters of morality. Police and firefighters should protect him because he is a person, because no one should be allowed to die or be hurt in that manner. He should have access to an education because he is a person. He should be able to get the medical treatment he needs because he is a person. Some of you believe police, fire, or judicial protections are rights that anyone should have and I doubt you can explain why. They are beliefs, morals, and this ethereal concept is what goes into defining "rights."
So, if these are rights, if you don't want to live in a world where they can be provided but aren't, take a long think. How are these any different from healthcare and education? I am not asking you to change your opinions; I am asking you to think. Are these really any different from the rest? It is possible to survive without any of them; would you want to?
People of Drexel, consider. Do not hide behind the "real world" and "economic realities." You do not have to rush out and campaign for universal health insurance or federally subsidized higher education. Just ask yourself the question: Why shouldn't everyone -children, middle class, illegal immigrants, criminals and all - have access to services we couldn't imagine living without? Are they something one has to earn, or inalienable rights fitting neatly under the call for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; values which have a meaning and truth deeper than politics?
Sam Chenkin is a sophomore majoring in information systems. He can be reached at ed-op@thetriangle.org.
And here we have finally arrived at our destination. We have entered the murky, confusing, poisonous, and scintillating waters of morality. Police and firefighters should protect him because he is a person, because no one should be allowed to die or be hurt in that manner. He should have access to an education because he is a person. He should be able to get the medical treatment he needs because he is a person. Some of you believe police, fire, or judicial protections are rights that anyone should have and I doubt you can explain why. They are beliefs, morals, and this ethereal concept is what goes into defining "rights."
So, if these are rights, if you don't want to live in a world where they can be provided but aren't, take a long think. How are these any different from healthcare and education? I am not asking you to change your opinions; I am asking you to think. Are these really any different from the rest? It is possible to survive without any of them; would you want to?
People of Drexel, consider. Do not hide behind the "real world" and "economic realities." You do not have to rush out and campaign for universal health insurance or federally subsidized higher education. Just ask yourself the question: Why shouldn't everyone -children, middle class, illegal immigrants, criminals and all - have access to services we couldn't imagine living without? Are they something one has to earn, or inalienable rights fitting neatly under the call for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; values which have a meaning and truth deeper than politics?
Sam Chenkin is a sophomore majoring in information systems. He can be reached at ed-op@thetriangle.org.
Be the first to comment on this story