What does it say about our society when we read that Denver police “will no longer confiscate blankets from homeless people during cold weather months”?
Pardon us for not being encouraged.
“We dropped two atom bombs, but not to worry, we won’t drop a third.”
“They’re not targeting hospitals in Aleppo anymore, only houses.”
“We won’t decapitate the captured American, just stab him to death.”
“We recognize Israel provided it stops occupying all Palestinian land outside the Tel Aviv bus station.”
“Negroes may serve in the US armed forces, just not sit at any dining counter.”
Spare us the good news.
Yes, we acknowledge that Denver has a homeless problem, and a public camping problem in particular. Yes, we acknowledge that solutions are required and are not easy to come by. But how low have we sunk if we now regard it as a piece of moral high ground not to take blankets away from people in freezing or sub-freezing temperatures?
Apparently in response to, or explanation of, the lifting of the blanket-confiscation policy, Denver Mayor Michael Hancock is quoted in the Denver Post, “As a city, we have a responsibility and moral obligation to protect the lives of our residents. Urban camping — especially during cold, wet weather — is dangerous and we don’t want to see any lives lost on the streets when there are safe, warm places available for people to sleep at night.”
The mayor is right. This is not a criticism of the mayor. Of course we have a moral obligation to protect lives and of course we prefer to see the homeless in safe and warm shelters. But what does it say when the mayor has to say all this in the context of the remission of an unspeakably cruel blanket-confiscation policy?
Not to mention, by what right may the city seize any lawfully held private property of anyone?
Without derogating from the difficulties the police face in handling a preference by hundreds or thousands of homeless people to camp out, and without minimizing the moral bankruptcy of a society that brings itself to allowing freezing people keep their own blankets, we have here symptoms of a deeper moral morass. The real issues, revealed by these symptoms, are Colorado’s woefully small funding for treatment of the mentally ill, and woefully underbuilt “affordable housing.”
The mental illness side of this is a lot harder to face, and because of that a lot harder to solve. People find it excruciatingly difficult to acknowledge that, when faced with a mentally ill person, there but for the grace of G-d go I.
True enough, the bricks-and-mortar “affordable housing” issue is far from simple, and not all homeless are mentally ill.
But however one slices and dices the elements of the homeless issue in Denver, the notice that Denver will no longer “confiscate blankets from the homeless” should shock us all. If that does not bring us up short and compel us into acknowledging how low we have sunk, nothing will.
Copyright © 2016 by the Intermountain Jewish News
