We seem to be no closer to the enlightened day foretold by noted philosopher Theodor Geisel in his seminal work “The Star Bellied Sneetches”.
A couple of things this week gave me pause when trying to decide who was actually in the wrong and who was in the right.
In the first, a child and family were removed from a flight because of the child’s allergy to dogs, of which there was one on the flight. The question here is, is a child’s allergy, traditionally enough to have a school ban an item, less important than another person’s right to have an emotional support animal?
The second involves a woman being moved on a flight because her presence was a problem to the orthodox Jew sitting next to her. Are religious rights more or less important than women’s rights?
Lastly, although the incident did not happen this week, it’s cropped up a lot over various news feeds this week, is an immuno-compromised child’s right to attend school more or less important than a parent’s right to choose not to vaccinate a child? A pertinent addendum here being that the school has a peanut butter ban in effect to protect allergic children.
These stories made me think that we really need to develop some sort of ranking system for whose rights supersede whose, a sort of human rights Top-Trumps if you will. With this in place issues could be quickly and efficiently resolved.