If only ethical decision making (in counselling) was as easy as punching in numbers into SPSS that churns out results in seconds, or throwing a coin into an Oracle's watery dwelling place and waiting for an answer to magically appear.
I've spoken to and observed a few people when it comes to the issue of giving money to people who are asking for it, either through selling tissue paper or just plain asking.
So recently i had a conversation with M about it and i found out that she would only give money to the people who seem like they deserve it.
That got me thinking. Some say that the attitude of the heart is what matters most to them. Meaning, they are not concerned with what the person-asking-for-money (PAFM) does with the money or whether they are part of a syndicate or whether they are deserving. To them, what matters is the attitude they have towards the PAFM, and they give unconditionally.
Some others try to do the practical thing, which is to find out what the PAFM needs, and provides that need directly if within their capability. Eg. Food.
Others choose to give only if they deem the PAFM deserving, with the "right" attitude when they approach them for money.
I don't have a fixed opinion for what i would do, because honestly, there are times when i give freely, and there are times when my heart is hardened.
Then i had a sudden thought. What if Jesus decided that only the deserving among us humans could be worth dying for? Then he can forget about dying and sacrificing himself for any one of us because none of us on this Earth is perfect or deserving.