Reply to an Answer

In response to the above opinion, I honorably dissent.  While there is a possibility for a schizophrenic to be self sustained, and the parent certainly has no legal obligation to a man of thirty, the voice of concience dictates a deeper verdict than a line in the sand.  As a culture, I am sure you will agree, my dear expert, that the charitable allocation of tax dollars to programs which alleviate the financial struggle of the sick, the handicapped, and the mentally ill, are a reflection of the heart of our society, a heart which recognizes a higher asperation than Darwins god.  In this sense, may I be so bold as to assert, that 'charity starts at home.'  How many homeless suffer from the crux of dementia?  Would we then say "all those over eighteen who litter this street, be you blood and brother, disperse, you are trash?"  Does $637 SSI seperate a man from hunger or guaruntee shelter from life's storms?  If the family can not afford to lift their kinsman by the arm we should cry, not congratulate.  If the family can create some solace for its afflicted and does nothing, how aggrieved should we then be?  The dynamics of our existence does not dictate that we climb from the mud and grime, lest it is to turn, to turn and look upon the writhing mass which has not found its way through the murk, turn and look and reach from our solidity, turn and look and reach--and lift one another up.  If not our brothers, our sons and our daughters, our mothers and our aged fathers, if not them...How tragic the plight of the stranger in this sodom.