Of Republican and Democrat babies

Here is a dilemma for those compassionate Democrats—and for compassionate Republicans as well. If you are a Democrat and see a helpless mother holding a baby, and there is a sign that indicates that the mother is a Republican—in fact, a supporter of George W. Bush. What would you do?

That was actually the dilemma faced by one confessor at Democrat Underground, who felt bad about passing over this baby. Some commenters at DU said that the confessor had done the right thing. (Thanks to World Magazine Blog for this story.) Oh, the ever compassionate Democrats! At least the confessor had, to whatever extent, struggled with her conscience. The commenters’ hatred is rather abominable in this case.

Yet sometimes situations may not be so simple. Consider three scenarios:

(a) Let us suppose you are a Republican, a passionate one at that. Further suppose that you have the ability to save one, and only one, baby. And you see two babies who are stranded. Which would you save? In this case, either one is morally acceptable.

(b) Suppose further that one baby is Democrat and the other is Republican, as indicated by the insignia on their wrapping cloths. Now which would you save? If you pick the Democrat baby, you seem to fulfill the command to love one’s “enemy” (or his descendant). But you lose a Republican! On the other hand, if you save the Republican baby, are you then practicing favoritism? I wonder why the additional information of party affiliation over scenario (a) changes the moral calculation of the situation. Galatians 6:10 says, “So then, as we have opportunity, let us do good to everyone, and especially to those who are of the household of faith.” Thus it appears that for a Christian priority ought to be given to fellow Christians. Does this apply with respect to party affiliation, too?

(c) Now let us say you encounter the babies not simultaneously, but sequentially. Suppose you saved the Republican baby first, and then saw the Democrat baby. Obviously you would not abandon the Republican baby to save the Democrat baby. But suppose you saved the Democrat baby first, and then saw the Republican baby. Would it be morally wrong to abandon the Democrat baby in order to save the Republican baby? (What about the analogous scenario of a Christian baby and a non-Christian baby?) I really do not know for sure. I suppose one can argue that it is by providence that one saw and saved the first baby seen, and once that event took place, the baby has been entrusted to one’s care, and abandoning the baby would mean abdicating the responsibility that one is given by God.

Of course, I could always blame George W. Bush for my moral dilemmas!