“He may have starved to death, but I believe he reaped what he sowed,” Mr. Kita said. “He was still young, so he could have taken on any job to feed himself.”
‘You know, don’t you think someone like that is better off dead?’
This article isn't surprising, but this is a nice example of how philosophy erases compassion in societies, but I wonder why that is. When someone has the means to help, but they choose not to, how does that happen? Does this person have any empathy towards others or is it trumped by philosophy in this instance? Could they be considered borderline sociopaths, because they show no care to what obviously is happening to another human, even though they have an ability to affect their plight? I wonder how many citizens of the US share these same opinions; thoughts they keep silent because of PCness? Eh, just a few musings.
