Monday, May 16, 2011
I've been in Person B's shoes a lot, and a lot of people will judge you when you do something like this in anger. But my question is this: What difference does it make? Won't people still benefit from the donated clothes regardless of the reason that they were donated? If Person B had donated someone else's clothes without their permission, then that would be wrong, but if the action is good, then we have no reason judge the reason behind the action.
The actions that we take can have either positive effects, negative effects, or no effects on other people. The only time we should question reasoning is if the action itself is harmful. It makes a difference if you punched someone to hurt them, or to get away because they tried to attack you, because the action harmed someone else. But in the case of the clothes, the action actually benefited other people. Here is a neutral example:
Let's say Person B breaks up with her significant other and decides that from now on, she's never wearing red again because it was their favorite color. Many people will judge this decision as silly and stupid and immature. But again, what difference does it make? What impact does her not wearing red actually have on anybody else? It is perfectly acceptable to not wear red because you don't like the color. How does it suddenly become unacceptable because someone has a different reason? We have no right to judge someone for acting based on their own feelings when the act itself does nothing wrong.