The Rich Have a Moral Obligation to Donate to the Poor - *Fall Tier Tournament - Round 1*

My thanks to bsh1 for setting up this tournament, and to Wylted in anticipation of an engaging debate. I would also like to extend a special thanks to Raisor for joining the tourney at the last moment resulting in me debating Wylted in the first round.IntroductionThe topic being debated is whether "The Rich Have a Moral Obligation to Donate to the Poor." There are several aspects to this question.What does it mean to donate? It means to give or to be charitable and to show compassion.The second part is what is a moral obligation? I contend that we are morally obligated to do that which is keeping with our nature. That which is in keeping with our nature will ultimately provide the best outcome for our species and thus forms a natural law which governs our species. Thus fundamentally speaking that which is moral is a true expression of the nature of ourselves.1. CompassionThe fundamental building block of humanity is the family. [1][2] And this fundamental unit illustrates compassion at play. All work as they are able at the various stages of life and all require aid at various stages of life. Prior to modern Western culture it was typical (and still is in most parts of the world) for a family to be multi-generational. Parents and grand-parents working together to raise and provide for the next generation and that generation taking care of the older generations as they become less capable. The weak and handicapped are provided for by the strong and able. This is both a moral obligation and an act of love through compassion completed by every generation.This concept of care and devotion between all members breaks down as people become further removed from familial settings. As such, people tend to have less empathy for a stranger than they do for a friend or family member.HistoryA civilization always has members that either through circumstance or deeds becomes a non-productive member of society and needs to rely on the generosity of strangers for survival. These people were forced to become beggars for their survival.The Greek and Roman philosophy were generally unkind with respect to selfless giving:"a poor man who was no longer able to work because of sickness should be left to die." Plato Republic 3.406d-410a"you do a beggar bad service by giving him food and drink; you lose what you give and prolong his life for misery." Plautus Trinummus 2.338-2.339Yet beggars did exist in these societies and survived on the generosity of others. While some people gave out of empathy for those begging, for many it was an act of trying to appease the gods as the receiver would often invoke the gods to bless the giver. [3]Our modern concept of societal charity begins with the Jews.In the Jewish society the patriarch of the family was the head of the family, his extended family and his workers. He was responsible for all of their well being. Likewise the Jewish God was protector of the entire Jewish nation and he has a special care and love for those who were the lowest members in society: Sing ye to God...who is the father of orphans, and the judge of widows. - Psalm 68:4-5 The Jews referred to themselves in a familial sense in that they were all sons of Abraham. This enabled them to have empathy and pity on the less fortunate in society as they were extended family. The Jewish laws reflected this concept and enforced mandatory aid from the haves to the have-naughts:"'When you reap the harvest of your land, moreover, you shall not reap to the very corners of your field nor gather the gleaning of your harvest; you are to leave them for the needy and the alien." Leviticus 23:22As you can see there was a necessity to permit the poor and even the foreigners to have sufficient to live off of. However, for the most part, Jewish charity was limited to Jews and had little impact on the non-Jewish nations around them. This was a result of the Jewish "familial sense" being limited to only those who were children of Abraham.The modern concept of charity is tied to the Christian concept of all people being equal in nature and the concept of agape. The Christian concept of equality of all people realized that there is an inherent dignity to all people and this dignity is required to be defended.Agape is a selfless descending love that desired the good of the other for the other. This was in contrast to Eros which was an ascending selfish love of the Greeks.This new concept of love led the early Christians to be agents of mercy in the world and resulting in taking care of widows and further brought about the end of such practices as infanticide. It was common for Romans to leave undesired newborns by the river to be swept away or eaten by wild animals (it is even enshrined in their tale of Romus and Remus). The Christians would go and collect these children and raise them as their own.This new form of Christian charity (agape) extended to the government when Constantine came to power. "He also acknowledged the new ideal of charity. Previous emperors had encouraged schemes to support small numbers of children in less favored families, the future recruits for their armies. Constantine gave funds to the churches to support the poor, the widow and orphans...Swollen by the Emperor's gifts, it helped the old, the infirm, and the destitute." [4] Ultimately, this is an additional form of enforced charity upon the wealthy as this is where the government receives a significant portion of its tax revenue.This Christian charity expanded through the middle ages and on into the modern era giving us the world we have today. 2. Natural LawAs previously described, the family is the fundamental building block of society. I believe that history clearly demonstrates that those cultures which have expanded this concept of family beyond strict blood relations become stronger and have improved results for all within the society.If we look at the Jews, this is a nation that has been conquered and displaced and even ceased to be a nation from 70 to 1948. And yet their greater sense of family and charity for one another permitted them to survive in foreign lands as a social and cultural entity for an extended period of time.Additionally, it was in Christian lands that all that we take for granted came to be. We have developed an understanding that everyone is equal before the law. [5] This concept is fundamental to our democratic systems, our legal systems, and our financial institutions.A democracy cannot truly exist if the concept of equality of people does not exist. The concept of one person one vote is dependent on adherence to this principle of equality.Fundamental to our legal system is the principle that everyone receives equal justice regardless of wealth or lack thereof.The above assurance of equality before the law enables a robust free market system. People can be assured that they will succeed or fail based on the merits of their endeavor.Now while I freely admit that our application of the above principles is never perfect, this is the ideal, the natural law and moral precept, which enables the greatest social, economic and technical advancements. All of this is predicated upon the inherent dignity of all people. Because without the inherent dignity of all people the concept of equality fails.However, if there is inherent dignity, it is the obligation of all people to uphold that dignity. Thus all people are obliged to aid others to maintain this basic dignity. The wealthy, being in a place of privilege, have a greater ability and thus responsibility to show mercy and maintain the dignity of people.ConclusionI have demonstrated that the world that we live in today has been forged by the concept of human dignity resulting from the realization that we are all one family. A family only survives upon agape, love of other for the sake of the other, and that the members of the family enter in and out of stages of giving and receiving charity from others.That which is moral is that which is in keeping with our true nature. And rationally speaking, that which is in keeping with our nature is that which will lead to the best result for humanity as a whole. That society which most closely follows the true nature, or natural law, of man will inevitably lead to the best results for mankind. The western Christian society progressed further and faster than other civilizations because they adhered to this natural law more closely than other civilizations.A central ideal of Western Christian societies was the concept of agape or the perfect self-giving love of God which gives each person an equal fundamental dignity. It is up to every member of society to uphold this dignity, both poor, and rich. However, given the greater ability of the rich to provide greater aid, there is a particular obligation of mercy upon them that cannot be accomplished by the poor.Thus, for the good of human race, there is a moral obligation on the rich to donate to the poor.I now invite Wylted to present his opening arguments.References[1] http://www.doctrinafidei.va...[2] http://www.un.org...[3] http://baringtheaegis.blogspot.ca...[4] http://www.christiancadre.org...[5] http://www.un.org...