How much do we think we are worth? Really? #Unitarians

Three related occurrences have happened to me in the past ten days.

Firstly, I was a bit piqued by something I read about a liberal stance towards society.  I read an item that said that a liberal focuses on individualism, freedom, justice and tolerance.  So far, so good.  But this is what was said about a liberal’s attitude towards justice: “A liberal says that people should get what they deserve.  Those who contribute a lot to society should get a lot back.  Nobody has to contribute, but those who don’t won’t get much back from society in return.”

I think of myself as a liberal person and something about this made me feel uncomfortable.

courtesy Redbubble

Secondly, using the Ringwood Unitarians' Twitter account, I came across a twitter thread:

Tweep 1: “Never ever let your dreams stop you from doing what you want. Show the world you can do things that people think are impossible! Disabled people can do anything if you put your mind to it!”

Tweep 2: “Sometimes. But quite a lot of us have conditions or disabilities that mean we can't fulfil those dreams. We aren't less for that. We aren't less for not being able to prove to people that disabled people can do things they thought they were impossible.  Our value is in who we are.”

Tweep 3: “Yup. Not in what you do.”

And thirdly, I took part in a discussion today in the context of the Southern Unitarian Association, in which we were deciding the amount of grant that should be extended in a certain case, by reference to precedent.  It was tempting to say a reduced amount should be given, owing to the differing circumstances.  But in the end, the question boiled down to whether one person was worth more grant today than had been another person a few years ago.

Put together, these three incidents put me in mind of the parable of the landowner of the vineyard, as told by Jesus of Galilee and reported in the book of Matthew, chapter 20 verses 1 to 16.  Jesus said that the kingdom of heaven — for which you may prefer to read ‘paradise’ — is like a landowner who one day hires people to work in his vineyard at various times.  At the end of the day, those who worked all day during the heat of the day expected to be paid more for their day than those who had stood in the market place, un-hired, during the heat of the day and who only worked an hour or two in the vineyard.  But the landowner paid them all the same, and challenged the grumblers, reminding them that they had got the agreed terms for their labour.

What are the agreed terms for our existence?  Is what we are due from life in any way at all contingent on what other people get from life?  Are we really to be measured against each other using some measure of worth?

~~~~~~~

Having dangled three occurrences before you, I will now satisfy your curiosity:

1.    I did some research and I found that the description of liberalism I had come across recently had been written in 2017 and had been completely re-written by its author in 2020.  The later version now expresses the characteristics of liberalism in terms of “freedom”, “freedom ‘from’” and “freedom ‘to’”.  https://www.simplepolitics.co.uk/explainers/liberalism/

2.   I was Tweep 3.

3.    The Southern Unitarian Association decided to grant the same amount in the immediate case as had been granted in the preceding case.