Citizenship as a Moral Question

[TomFoolery]

It's a topic that often comes up in relation to foreign aid and immigration in America (and I'm sure most other Western nations as well) about a need to help our own before helping others.

I have friends that are attempting to adopt a baby from China and so far the reaction has mostly been negative, because a lot of people in their lives seem to feel that they are misguided for taking in a baby from overseas when there are millions of kids in America in foster care. And that extends to pretty much anything we do offshore. Any time the U.S. sends so much as a bag of rice to Liberia or grants asylum to human trafficking victims, there always seems to be a rather angry group of hecklers pissed because we're feeding starving people somewhere else when there are hungry people here in the states, or we're letting people stay here and take jobs and government assistance when we have Americans who need jobs and homes too.

Do you feel like it matters? Do nations have a moral obligation to support their own citizens before helping others?

[dtq123]

You all might want to answer this question, what makes people from different nations, different?

I honestly don't care as an ignorant 15 year old should.

[Mike Cl]

It's a topic that often comes up in relation to foreign aid and immigration in America (and I'm sure most other Western nations as well) about a need to help our own before helping others.

I have friends that are attempting to adopt a baby from China and so far the reaction has mostly been negative, because a lot of people in their lives seem to feel that they are misguided for taking in a baby from overseas when there are millions of kids in America in foster care. And that extends to pretty much anything we do offshore. Any time the U.S. sends so much as a bag of rice to Liberia or grants asylum to human trafficking victims, there always seems to be a rather angry group of hecklers pissed because we're feeding starving people somewhere else when there are hungry people here in the states, or we're letting people stay here and take jobs and government assistance when we have Americans who need jobs and homes too.

Do you feel like it matters? Do nations have a moral obligation to support their own citizens before helping others?

And isn't it ironic that there is such a hue and cry about the welfare state of our country?  If somebody wants to help in another part of the world then I've heard people, just as you state above,  put it down with statements like--why not help the needy people in this country?  Then the same people put down welfare.  I think that first and foremost a country should help it's own citizens.  (As a country I think the US has failed in that task--we need to do much more for the poor of this country)  That does not mean it should not help other countries when they can, according to it's ability to do so and in certain circumstances. 

As individuals, we should be allowed to help whomever we wish.  If I want to help a poor Chinese family, I should be able to do that as I see fit.  So, kudos for that couple who want to adopt a Chinese baby.  Good for them.  And if a complaining neighbor wants to have a poor US family helped, then go for it.  Otherwise, shut up!

[GSOgymrat]

Governments have obligations to their citizens. The U.S. government needs to provide services to U.S. citizen first because as citizens and taxpayers we pay for those services-- it is why government exists. How much foreign aid should be given to people outside the U.S. should be an ongoing discussion by our citizens and representatives based on available resources. As far as the actions of individuals or organizations, I feel people in need are the same regardless of nationality. If I was on a sinking ship I wouldn't be helping Americans first, I would be working to save as many people as possible. Adopting a baby that is receiving no support seems more moral than adopting a baby already being provided for in U.S. foster care, so I don't agree that American babies are more precious. If I want to use my money and time to assist people in another country who are victims of a natural disaster, or petition the U.S. government to provide assistance, I have every right to do so.

[TomFoolery]

To me a child in need is a child in need. Period. Really the same goes for people. As an American I feel as though I won the social lottery, and the soil I happened to plop out on shouldn't have a bearing on my worthiness for access to food, shelter, clothing and medical care.

In some small way, I wonder where people come up with these border lines of decency. What point is the lowest common denominator? If I want to be mad about my tax dollars going to help hungry kids in Africa instead of America, why stop there? Why should my tax dollars go toward feeding hungry kids in California when there are hungry kids in my home state of South Carolina? Why would I want to feed hungry kids in Charleston, SC when there are hungry kids in Columbia where I live? I realize there is a difference between state and federal taxes, and as a taxpayer I have a right to vote for people who distribute it in a way I approve of, but I think we stoop a little low when we think the people in our own communities are somehow more important than anyone else.

If Americans were universally as poor and in need of services as people in Sierra Leone or wherever, I don't know that it really matters at that point. Helping people here or helping people there, we're all in the same boat. But disaster relief and even economic development in third world countries are often more than just a handout. When we make poorer countries more capable of competing in the global market, we all win.

[Nihil-ist]

Maybe if we spent less on war...

[AllPurposeAtheist]

Foreign aid is not always what it appears. Quite often it's in the form of bribes to influence other nations to do our bidding and create favorable atmospheres for corporations coupled with crippeling debt to the nations we send "aid" to.

[Solitary]

The very fact that moral decisions are based on money in the United States says it all. We throw away enough food in this country every day to feed those who need it, but we have regulations made by politicians to prevent it in the name of safety, when there isn't a damned thing wrong with the food. If I see anyone suffering for any reason, whether they are of any race or from any country, I help. Should I help the ones from the United States first is a hypothetical question, I prefer to base my helping others on their needs. We spend trillion and trillions on the military industrial complex, and war, and people recent it when we help people in other countries after we blow them up?  To help Americas first is ridiculous when we have the means to help everyone in the world, including our own. "First, kill all the lawyers!" I would include politicians that have the ethics of the Nazis.   

[TomFoolery]

Foreign aid is not always what it appears. Quite often it's in the form of bribes to influence other nations to do our bidding and create favorable atmospheres for corporations coupled with crippeling debt to the nations we send "aid" to.

Most things I've ever read about foreign aid indicates it's a pretty mixed bag that's difficult to gauge the success of. I won't deny that it's often used in illicit ways: hell, I saw some of the literal drug deals (think poppies) pulled off by the state department in Afghanistan.

The very fact that moral decisions are based on money in the United States says it all. We throw away enough food in this country every day to feed those who need it, but we have regulations made by politicians to prevent it in the name of safety, when there isn't a damned thing wrong with the food. If I see anyone suffering for any reason, whether they are of any race or from any country, I help.

A few months ago I gave the change from the center console of my car to a homeless guy who asked for it and was chastised by this old fucker for it when I walked into a gas station. I was informed I was just helping him be lazy. Yes, because giving someone less than a dollar in change allows them to "live it up" and "scam the system." The truth is, I don't know if he was really going to buy food and other necessities or if he was going to buy alcohol or drugs with it. When it comes to like, 84 cents in change, who the fuck cares? It's a gift freely given, a tiny pittance of money that wasn't even doing me any good sitting in a cup holder. But you're right, there is a morality attached to money that doesn't belong, as if those who don't have it are being punished by the universe for their laziness and wickedness. I don't think I'm a saint because I gave a guy some change, but I don't understand the spirit of meanness to be greedy over things we don't even want or have a real need for.

[Solitary]

Ditto! There will always be lazy people, and people that think the world owes them a living, and people that take advantage of the system, and also very ungrateful people. But should we assume everyone that needs help are? It is very hard for people that really need assistance to get it now because of people like that, that know how the system works and how to get around it----like bombarding the regulation offices with paper work so they are not ignored. My son who is on disability and having a hard time getting it was told by a person that took advantage of the system how to get help. The people that really rile me up are those that keep having as many kids as they can have so they can receive more from the government. When people see how incredibly our country leaders have no ethics, or morality, they follow the leaders, just like people that follow the Televangelist.   

[peacewithoutgod]

As an individual, your charity is your own choice. Even when it comes to offering aid and comfort to those of an enemy nation, I see it no differently, especially when it was one of our drones that leveled an innocent family's home. However, on government actions, I'm 100% with GSO on that - no government which demands my allegiance, my income, and my responsiveness in any way has the right to feed, house, employ, or educate people outside of its home jurisdiction as a first priority. This principle is the very foundation of government, and it is one which Obama and Hillary have been in criminal violation of.

[TomFoolery]

I'm 100% with GSO on that - no government which demands my allegiance, my income, and my responsiveness in any way has the right to feed, house, employ, or educate people outside of its home jurisdiction as a first priority. This principle is the very foundation of government, and it is one which Obama and Hillary have been in criminal violation of.

You say as a first priority... what constitutes that, and who determines it? Less than 1% of the $4 trillion federal budget goes to foreign aid, with most of that being HIV/AIDS projects and other health projects like emergency assistance for Ebola and SARS, which does in a round about way have an effect on global and U.S. populations. So I'd hardly call that a "priority."

http://kff.org/global-health-policy/poll-finding/data-note-americans-views-on-the-u-s-role-in-global-health/

[peacewithoutgod]

Governments have obligations to their citizens. The U.S. government needs to provide services to U.S. citizen first because as citizens and taxpayers we pay for those services-- it is why government exists. How much foreign aid should be given to people outside the U.S. should be an ongoing discussion by our citizens and representatives based on available resources. As far as the actions of individuals or organizations, I feel people in need are the same regardless of nationality. If I was on a sinking ship I wouldn't be helping Americans first, I would be working to save as many people as possible. Adopting a baby that is receiving no support seems more moral than adopting a baby already being provided for in U.S. foster care, so I don't agree that American babies are more precious. If I want to use my money and time to assist people in another country who are victims of a natural disaster, or petition the U.S. government to provide assistance, I have every right to do so.

GSO, I agree with you on the obligation of a government to the working citizens who pay it's bills, for the quality of the world which they live in. Nobody wants to live in a world where people live in the streets, but still they are all over the US. It's cruel, it's depressing to see, and it's a pitiful embarassment. Nobody wants to live with the fact that the foster care system is the most cruel institution in any so-called free nation, but it is. The backbone of it is greed, not mercy. The abuse within this system is rampant, and the slightest childish failure by any foster child often leads to one more social failure as s(he) is forced to pack up and move on to the next family which is cruel enough to exploit him (her). Therefore, I truly could care less what problems people in other countries are facing while such shameful problems persist at home. There is no such thing as a child in a different country who is receiving less care than an American in the foster system - if there was, they could mail you the kid, already dead. While I respect the rights of the individual to make his own choice regarding who they will help, I cannot respect any American's claim to morality for bringing in a foreign baby while American children still go uncared for, rotting in the cruel foster system.

[GSOgymrat]

While I respect the rights of the individual to make his own choice regarding who they will help, I cannot respect any American's claim to morality for bringing in a foreign baby while American children still go uncared for, rotting in the cruel foster system.

I agree that given our wealth and resources Americans do a poor job of caring for each other but do you feel a child born in America is inherently more deserving of support than a "foreign" child? Is there a number of foreign children whose welfare would equal the welfare of one American child? I work in community mental health and I'm very familiar with social services and healthcare. I want a system in the US where everyone has access to food, healthcare, employment, education and other services. I agree that the current system is broken but I am not going to judge any individual as immoral because he or she chooses to help children, no matter which country that child is born.

[TomFoolery]

Nobody wants to live with the fact that the foster care system is the most cruel institution in any so-called free nation, but it is. The backbone of it is greed, not mercy. The abuse within this system is rampant, and the slightest childish failure by any foster child often leads to one more social failure as s(he) is forced to pack up and move on to the next family which is cruel enough to exploit him (her).

Orphanages were (and in many countries are) worse. There will always be abandoned and unwanted children in any society. It's shitty and foster care could certainly be improved upon, but it's still light years away from Romania that used to literally warehouse babies in cribs for years.

There is no such thing as a child in a different country who is receiving less care than an American in the foster system - if there was, they could mail you the kid, already dead.

Apparently you've never seen kids in Chinese or Eastern Bloc orphanages.

While I respect the rights of the individual to make his own choice regarding who they will help, I cannot respect any American's claim to morality for bringing in a foreign baby while American children still go uncared for, rotting in the cruel foster system.

Maybe you should do some research into what goes on in other countries. I visited an orphanage in Afghanistan. It was fucking heinous. Even in the foster care system in America, children get a free and appropriate education, they get healthcare and they get food, clothing and shelter without fear of stepping on landmines or being married off at age nine or sold into prostitution at age three because their real families can't afford to feed them. I don't say these things to make it sound like American foster care is a luxury or that kids in American foster care should be grateful just to have those things, but I don't think you're taking into account what some kids in some foreign countries experience.

I don't reserve my respect for people that help American children because the American foster care system sucks. I respect people who support the welfare of any child without regard to what flag happened to be flying nearby on the day they were born.