Mark Hansen wrote:JamLifeIntoDeath wrote:And also, while it would be beyond ignoble of me to criticize the foster parent for opening their hearts and homes to this poor girl, I really almost think that their efforts would be better placed had they adopted one of the hundreds of (I hate to say "normal", for obvious reasons, but...) kids who didn't spend seven years locked up in a shitty cockroach closet who could (I think) benefit from a family as loving and patient as this one more than Dani.
Is this a horrible thing for me to say? I feel like I'm trying to read my moral compass in a lodestone maze.
So, we're not even supposed to try to help children who have gone through this? I'm sure that's not what you mean, but I really don't get what you're trying to say.
It's really hard to describe how I feel about this.
Is it possible to put a value on human life, or any life for that matter, or any
thing for that matter? Is it even possible to place the value of things on a continuum relative to one another? Objectively? I don't fucking know. I
do think that one of the first things that set us apart from other species evolutionarily speaking was a need to communicate, which accordingly led to values being attributed to abstract symbols, which led to religion, cultural diversity, government, economy, and a whole slew of other very "human" concepts, but most importantly and encompassing all of those concepts, it led to catagorization.
We needed to be able to put things into catagories, because comparison was invaluable to our developing collective. We've never looked back. At this point, I think that it's likely that we've evolved, maybe even
consciously (as in, by choice) evolved to have brains that are wired to use catagories. Say what you will, and I'd appreciate feedback, but I would be surprised if the proliferation of neurons in the brain of a modern day child weren't geared to reflect the absurd leap in scientific, social, and technological complexity that we've made since the paleolithic.
I know I ramble, but I do have a point. Maybe i'm stalling because it makes me feel heartless to just spew. You can drink out of a bowl or a bucket, but which one is more of a cup?
Catagories make our lives much easier on us, but in using them we often attempt to simplify very complex ideas that -- and here is my dilemma -- maybe should not be simplified.
A perfect example of this type of problem is abortion.
*deep breath* here I go:
In this case, we have Dani, a mistreated and undeniably pitiable case. I would gladly give my left testicle to give her the chance to reach her "full potential as a human being". What does that mean, though? What if she'd been born filthy rich and smart and healthy and beautiful? What if she'd been born paralyzed? Schizophrenic? In a village in Darfur fifteen minutes before an attack by the janjiweed?
Things I know: We can't change our origins and we can't change the past.
So. The fact that Dani
could have grown up without all the problems she has is clearly tragic. This absolutely could have been avoided (although, with two older brothers with IQs of 50 and a mom in the 70s, she very likely would still have had serious handicaps). However, at this point, done is done. May and could and maybe and might are wonderful hopeful words to use to describe such a sad story, but what about kids all over the fucking world whose futures, if they were given into a household like that of Dani's foster parents, could shine (relatively speaking) like the sun to Dani's candle?
This issue has bothered me since high school. What say you?[/b]
Madness waits for some. It creeps up on others.