A few days ago Christian Stöcker (Der Spiegel Online, April 26) proposed his readers a thought experiment. Before casting their votes in the next elections, Australian readers would do well to think about it:
Imagine this: You and your partner have a child of primary-school age with a rare hereditary disease. By the time they’re 18, they will begin to experience increasingly severe pain and other unpleasant side effects. Their life expectancy will be severely reduced.
There is, however, a treatment that could potentially hinder the outbreak of this disease. It's expensive and, because it's still experimental, it isn't covered by your health insurance. To pay for it, you’ll have to make some financial sacrifices, like selling your car or not going on any trips abroad for a while.
Would you tell your child that you had thought about it, but they were simply asking too much?
----------
When it comes to tackling climate change (just a part of the environmental catastrophe threatening not merely our living standards, but our civilisation, our own species’s survival and even life as we know it) Australian voters are being offered two answers to that question. Scott Morrison wants you to focus on “how much will it cost?” knowing full well no clear answer is forthcoming, but in any event the answer is “not cheap”. Your own conscience -- certainly not Bill Shorten -- suggests this answer: “whatever it takes”.
I can’t answer Stöcker’s question for you. Nobody can. Ultimately, it’s your children. It’s up to you. It’s your responsibility, your conscience, not mine.
If there’s a God, may He have mercy of your soul if your answer is wrong.
----------
UPDATE:
Today is the first of May (h/t David Ruccio).
No comments:
Post a Comment