Even in America, the richest country in the world, poverty exists. The economic status of individuals is identified by degrees of wealth. There exists the rich, the well-off and the poor. Even within these classes there are distinctions. For example, there are the wealthy, and then there is Bill Gates. There is the man who barely gets the bills paid and the man who lives in the shotgun shack.
But there is a deciding factor than can quickly place us all into one of two groups: a home. When it comes to a roof over one’s head, it’s simple-a person is either homeless or not.
For those of us who live a “sheltered” life, our reactions toward the homeless may be to spare some change or to yell, “Go get a job.”
Scotty Weeks and Derrick Clark, two men from Seattle, took a different approach. They chose to give up their daily lives and become homeless for a week. They each kept a daily journal to record their experience. You can read about the experience of these two men who traded their warm beds, hot showers and “super-nice coffee” for a week of homeless life at their Web site, www.homelessweek.com
Their experiment answered some important questions regarding the homeless. One, there are phonies out there. Weeks said, “There are people I’ve grown to disdain like the guys on the freeway entrance that have a pile of signs, rotate, work in shifts and drive off in cars afterward.”
The truth is, a large number of the homeless can get a job, but choose not to. About midweek, Scotty realized, “I have drive, skills and I’m reasonably free of any debilitating mental disorders. So, if I really were in this spot, I could pull myself out rather quickly.”
On the other side, there are those who need help. Weeks told the story of a man in a cafZ who “couldn’t stop laughing and playing with his empty prescription bottles.”
For these people, a go-get-a-job attitude is not the answer. Spare change and a sandwich don’t provide a permanent fix. Empathy should be focused on these people-victims of bad luck, not bad choices. What should we do for these people? We share what we can.
Take the example of the Good Samaritan. In the parable, the Samaritan does what he’s able by providing a few provisions for the night-no more, no less. He doesn’t put his life on hold to save the plight of all the hungry in the world, but he gives within his means.
The Boom Town CafZ, an eatery in Seattle, gives a modern-day example of how to help. This restaurant provides the homeless an opportunity to work for their meals. This method reinforces the idea that it’s possible to work out of a bad fix.
The Boom Town CafZ doesn’t give out free meals, but they do their part by helping within their means; however, for the homeless who can do something about their situation through opportunities like this one and refuse, their laziness is inexcusable.
But how can we distinguish the needy from the lazy? Overcoming the fear that our generosity may go to support some habit seems to be the biggest obstacle. It’s hard to give to strangers whose existence we view as barely human.
Perhaps we should view the homeless as something more than human.
It’s more than just adhering to the ways of the Good Samaritan. The Book of Hebrews tells us, “Do not neglect to show your hospitality to strangers, for by this some have entertained angels without knowing it.”
It’s a far reach for most to compare the homeless with the divine, but whether we share this faith, it’s an attitude we could all adopt for our encounters with those in need.
Michael Stewart is a junior philosophy and religion major.