Stuck at home recovering from a stomach bug today, so not much else to do but blog a little more since I finished my sermon earlier. (Probably a case of TMI right there, but oh well.)
Came across this article on MSN:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42985277/ns/weather/
The tremendous flooding on the Mississippi has resulted in one of those catch 22 situations. Flood New Orleans or flood 2,500 people and 2000 buildings on 3 million acres with another 22,500 people and 11,000 buildings being affected.
Tough choice, huh?
As a Christian, I'd have to ask myself what kind of ethics would one put into place in making such a decision. Do you decide based upon the fewest number of people affected? A classic case of sacrificing the few to save the many? Do you decide upon the basis of what the law dictates? (Although I'm not exactly sure what the law would say in this particular case?
And what about the responsibility of folks who decided to live and build in such places where such a thing is possible? (Blame the victim folks may raise their objections now.)
How are Christians called to make such decisions in these cases?
I mean, isn't the property of those few just as valuable to them as the property of the many in New Orleans?
Isn't it setting a bad precedent to make a decision purely based upon the fewest number of people--therefore the fewest dollars needed to repair--affected?
What about the preservation of private property?
Oooh. What a complicated dilemma.
Anyone out there with any answers?
No comments:
Post a Comment