It’s been ages since I posted anything (new or otherwise) to this space and I was bound and determined to change that today. After thinking and writing and hunting and drafting, I’ve finally settled on this. It’s not quite what I had in mind, but I’m not a failure dammit so this will have to do…
Hypothetical Situation: A bear wanders into a small town and after authorities have been alerted to its presence they convene to figure out what to do. They have one person who is actively tracking the bear and are gathering info.
They learn that it will cost 1,320 dollars to bring a team in who can tranquilize the bear and load it onto a truck and drive it a safe 100 miles back into the wilderness where it can be released to wake and go about its bear business.
The group then begins to discuss where to get the money to hire the team and a debate begins. Half of the people think that they need to get the money any way they can because the town’s children’s lives are at stake. The bear could wander into a park and attack innocent people and isn’t the 1,320 dollars a small price to pay to save a life?
The other half of the group argue that the bear wandered into the town and will wander back out. The town’s children need to be taught to be alert and aware and look forward instead of looking at their shoes. They further their point by stating that people cannot protect their children from all the bad things they will encounter in their life and that the children should learn that these things exist and that they need to be prepared. The world is full of bears, and worse, so they should use this as an learning opportunity and let the story unfold naturally.
The first half of the group is outraged and continues to press that consequences for not interfering are too great and it is not worth it to take that risk. Meanwhile the man on the street tracking the bear’s movements follows the bear onto a farmers field where the pumpkins are being harvested.
The bear startles a farmer on a tractor pulling a wagon load of pumpkins. The tractor veers off course, hits a bump, and the wagon becomes unhitched. The load of pumpkins rolls down the slope toward the bear and the bear, never having been attacked by vegetables before is equally as startled and begins to run away. The two men watch as the bear runs in the opposite direction of the town. Never to be seen or heard from again.
Question 1: Which group do you agree with in the debate over whether or not to spend the money on the removal of the bear from the town?
Question 2: Why?
Question 3: If the alternate ending of the story was that the bear ended up in the town park and attacked a 4 year old who was holding a delicious pot of honey, would your answer to the first two questions change?
My personal conclusion: Both groups are right. And – one should not live in a town that sometimes experiences wandering bears and if they do, they should never go to the park with a pot of honey.
OK – So that was kind of a ridiculous exercise, given the fact that I heard that entire story on a radio program (yes kids, I said a radio program – pronounced rā-dē-ˌō). But this is the only thing I could come up with to post for today, so whatever.