Coronavirus pandemic: Values, ethics of society being challenged to its core | Opinion

I am seeing the best from people these days:

The church committee that picks up meals for its congregants who at advanced ages are unable or afraid to go out themselves to the market.

The medical professionals who persist in their work knowing that they are understaffed or under-supplied to perform their jobs under conditions that might not be safe.

I am touched by the compassion and care we are seeing in organizations that are raising money to feed children.

Even the business community is innovating with all sorts of deals to get the public to buy their carry-out food, and devoting a portion of the profits to their employees to supplement their unemployed status.

All sorts of heroic stories are coming out now, which should reconfirm our faith in humanity and in God too.

Yes, there is another side to this rosy picture.

Why does someone who tests for the COVID-19 coronavirus and, rather than quarantine themselves for between 24-48 hours, instead go out in public and hang out with colleagues and friends? Is that person a bad person? Are they evil?

For some people, it is about not thinking things through.

There are others who ignore this pandemic, who feel they know better.

Then there are others whose values do not match our values.

Let me give you an example.

Recently, Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick spoke on television about his view toward the ethical dilemma regarding the importance of saving lives versus the critical value of preserving the economy. There is increasing discussion about where our priorities should be these days. Preserve life? At what cost? Should we preserve life if it means damaging the economy?

For some people, the answer is that we have to walk back these panic stricken initial public safety measures designed to flatten the coronavirus curve.

Patrick has given his answer to the question. On talk shows and in writing, he has been reported to have said, “So, my message is that, let’s get back to work, let’s get back to living, let’s be smart about it, and those of us who are 70-plus, we will take care of ourselves, but don’t sacrifice the country. Don’t do that. Don’t ruin this great American dream.”

I think I get the idea, which is that we senior citizens should do the patriotic thing and, if necessary, be prepared to let ourselves succumb to the virus rather than in the long run allow it to deprive our progeny of their rightful inheritance of economic security.

His ideas are frightening. To think that age alone must determine the value of human life, that is, who will live and who will die, is unconscionable.

In Judaism, we have a concept called Pikuach Nefesh. It means saving a life. Judaism is a religion based upon 613 God-given commandments. One may violate any of them in order to save a human life.

The rabbinic commentaries over the centuries never say what is the dividing line between what is considered, in Patrick’s worldview, a suitable age to allow oneself to be sacrificed for the health of the economy.

Of course, so many of us would give up our lives for our grandchildren or our children. I’ve heard people make those kind of statements, including myself.

Yet, when it comes to the idea of the strongest survive to perpetuate the species, in a Darwinian sense, it feels just wrong.

Self-quarantine is one thing, but, self selecting oneself to be offered up on the altar of economic stability is grotesque. It sounds like some horror move from the previous millennium.

People of faith should be able to agree that it is the duty of the young to honor and support the old. I seem to remember a commandment that says, “Honor thy father and thy mother so that your days will be long on the face of the earth.”

That is the only commandment out of the Ten Commandments in Exodus chapter 20 that has a reward or inducement for fulfilling it in the second clause of the verse.

What kind of a society would we be if we taught that older people should sacrifice their lives for the benefit of the young?

The values and ethics of our society are being challenged to its core with the folks who tell us to stay inside and retreat from societal intersection at all costs, versus those who say the cure is worse than the disease.

Religion is about sanctifying life and providing teachings that guide us on how to live and how to know the difference between right and wrong and good and evil.

Saving lives is the highest honor that a human can achieve.

One statement in my tradition says, “He who saves a life is as if he saved the entire world.” Another one says, “He who destroys a life is as if he destroyed an entire world.”

Rabbi Brad Bloom of Hilton Head Island writes on issues of faith.