I rarely have a conversation about specific current events, however this will be one of those times. My reason for writing about Iran is that it breaks my heart to see their struggle and have no direct influence to effect it. Specifically, I am referring to the Iranian citizen protesters who are being denied and physically punished for trying to advocate for the same rights that I would fight and defend to keep in America. The sovereignty of Iran, as an independent country, prohibits outside interference without a compelling reason beyond which has been displayed by the existing ruling regime. This standard of non-interference within the borders of a recognized country is the hallmark of civilized behavior and respect for our different cultures to rule their own destinies. This ideal is only that however, an ideal. Pragmatically, I want to defend the principles I hold that others are struggling to obtain. The conflict of an ideal and a pragmatic impulse is perplexing. As a rational being I must respect international interpretations relative to rules of sovereignty, but as a member of the human race I have a higher duty to protect life when I perceive injustice, regardless of legal convention. I am not advocating any particular or general action, I am advocating the compassion and curiosity, which, in my mind, differentiate humans from animals. To hold the principles of compassion and curiosity, I must practice them at a level that would never compromise their purpose. My argument for helping the Iranian people is valid in that it places struggle for justice above a sense of security; In helping the Iranian citizens we provide for a better practical security then which otherwise would be realized under the current Iranian administration. Whatever we do as a country or individuals let it be clear that the moral justification trumps the legal justification of non-interference.
No comments:
Post a Comment