Should We All Have An Obligation To Assist Others?

Everyone should have the right to live a stable life with all the necessary essentials, which include food, shelter, and medical care. Unfortunately, not every individual in our world has access to either one or all of these essential life elements. In Peter Singer’s essay, “Famine, Affluence, and Morality”, Singer emphasizes the importance of giving back to those who are less fortunate. Singer in particular claims that those who are affluent individuals should feel morally obligated to donate to humanitarian causes.

“A basic moral test is how our most vulnerable members are faring. In a society marred by deepening divisions between rich and poor, our tradition recalls the story of the Last Judgment (Mt 25:31-46) and instructs us to put the needs of the poor

Do people have the right to rescue services when they put themselves at risk? Mountain climbing is an activity of climbing mountains. For helicopter services, each cost about $2 million apiece and the helicopter could only take one climber. The air is very thin on the higher level of the mountain, climbers may have faced bad weather. Members of climber are increasing in the climbing season, many of them are in the death zone that there are traffic jams. People do not have the right to rescue services when they put themselves in a risky because people may die, and bad environment.

In his article Rich and Poor, Peter Singer argues that we have a moral obligation to give assistance to people in absolute poverty. He derived this conclusion from three premises. The first states that if it is in our power to prevent something bad from happening without sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance, then we ought to it. The second premise is that absolute poverty is a bad thing. The third premise is that we are able to alleviate some portion of absolute poverty without giving up anything of comparable moral significance. To illustrate the urgency of our duty to assist the poor, he believes that in a case where we happen to walk pass a child drowning in a shallow pond, the vast majority of people would agree that it would be seriously morally wrong to not rescue the child. Connecting this scenario to Singer’s argument, we can say it is seriously morally wrong to not assist the poor because the lives of these people in need are of greater moral importance than the excess income we would otherwise spend on luxury goods. Thus, Singer is correct in saying that we have a moral obligation to assist the poor, and that failing to do so is equally as morally wrong as failing to rescue the drowning child.

Protecting the rights and dignity of the poor and oppressed is the most important moral duty of the church.’ Critically evaluate this statement with reference to Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Martin Luther King.

Because mankind was made in God’s image, Christians aspire to follow the footsteps of Jesus as he leads the pathway to the Kingdom of God. So just as Jesus, “healed the leper, the paralyzed, the blind, the deaf, and many who suffer from many diseases,” followers of the gospel are called to “pass through this world doing good.” Not only did Jesus heal, but he turned it around and allowed the once sick to heal. They became “agents of healing and invited to be agents of their own destiny” (Saying and Showing, pg. 31). And as Christians, the gospel calls them to do the same, focusing their attention to the “most abandoned and mistreated” and help bring them to be a part of society.

Unfortunately, this fact is so true of our society today, but Yancey goes on to show how Jesus makes an extra effort to reach out to he poor. He gives a list, which he got from another writer, on the advantages of being poor. This list really made an impact on me. It showed me how I need to be more open to what God has to say, and not so involved with the materialistic and secular views of today. I need to focus on what God has planned for me, and not make my focus to be what other people think of me. “Strength, good looks, connections, and the competitive instinct may bring a person success in a society like ours, but those very qualities may block entrance to the kingdom of heaven” (Yancey 114).

Luke’s Gospel greatly emphasizes the social justice aspect of Christian living. Throughout the third book in the New Testament, the story and history of Jesus Christ is written, and Luke preserves the many sayings of Jesus warning that those with material possessions have a

your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the

I am only thinking about myself and have been conditioned by society that the poor are beneath me. Just as hooks states in her book, “Society is telling them that poverty and nihilism are one and the same. If they cannot escape poverty, then they have no choice but to drown in the image of a life that is valueless” (hooks, 198), we have been taught by society to believe that poverty and nihilism are synonymous, but this is not true. Just as it takes a village to raise a child, I believe it takes a nation to resolve the issue of poverty. Our society needs to dig deep to reignite the morals that generations in the past taught us; sharing our resources, whether monetarily or charitably, through understanding, kindness and generosity to those less fortunate. We all have to be ready to share liberally and recognize the fact that there are those who struggle and deserve attention paid to their struggles. By helping others who have not, we keep our humanity intact and maintain our ability to empathize and show compassion towards others. Our culture is based on working together and helping our neighbors. We need to stop considering the poor invisible and instead take personal steps to keep our communities thriving via good will towards others, and lending a helping hand. The poor, just as our environment, are our responsibility, and the sharing of resources is crucial to bringing an individual from poverty to a more

Philosophers, Peter Singer’s and Onora O’Neill’s attempt to draw connection between poverty and moral philosophy and how aid should be directed towards groups in absolute poverty. The aim of this paper is to provide an extensive analysis on the work of both the philosophers’ while outlining some of the limitations each of the theories has.

We all heard countless solutions on how to solve world poverty. In Peter Singer’s article “Rich and Poor”, he discusses how he thinks this problem can be fixed. Singer claims that we all have a responsibility to support people who are in extreme need and are suffering from absolute poverty. Singer believes that poverty could be fixed if people give up their luxuries and give the money that they spent on unnecessary things to those who are destitute. In Singer 's mind, we all have a duty to give until we are no longer able to, or until the problem with the world poverty will be solved. Singer feels that it is necessary for people who are more wealthy to help those who are less fortunate by donating money right away to organizations that help fight poverty. In his opinion, by not helping those in need we are negatively responsible for their suffering and thus failing to live a moral life.

Giger and Davidhizar’s Transcultural Assessment Model is a valuable and functional assessment tool that evaluates the different cultural variables and how those variables effect health, illness and behaviors (Giger, 2013). This philosophy considers the uniqueness of each individual, understanding that the individual is unique, a product of their culture, religion, environment socioeconomic status and diversity. Giger and Dividhizar propose that, as health care providers, we need an acute awareness of the ethnicity and culture of each individual, having the knowledge and understanding to care for them as

people of God: “Has not God chosen those who are poor in the eyes of

For example; the United States itself and other nations such as Somalia and Congo continue to have people with no shelter over their head and those with no food to eat, regardless of how hard some may strive to make ends meet, they are still in poverty. As those more auspicious, we should consider it as a moral obligation to assist those people who are less fortunate, be it those in the same nation as us or those farther away.