> Someone noticed that we were puzzled by this a told us that this is due to Indian culture. First, if someone is seriously hurt or killed that's this person's

> Someone noticed that we were puzzled by this a told us that this is due to Indian culture. First, if someone is seriously hurt or killed that's this person's (perhaps deserved) fate. As an Indian I can tell you that that viewpoint is incorrect. Culture is the last thing that would come in between a good-samaritan and a person in need. > Second, helping others may not be as much a moral imperative as it is in a Christian culture Are you implying that Christians don't exist in India? If they do, then why are Christian Indians not coming to the rescue of those who met with an accident? This is a completely incorrect take on the situation. Mixing religion with a social issue is dangerous. Indian culture is good enough that we can accommodate any culture and have been doing so for centuries. To say that we do not have moral fiber is an insult. If that was the case why is it that when there is a terror attack or a natural tragedy in India people help in huge numbers? See the number of people out there to help in the recent Kolkatta Flyover accident: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XmvROEYYps https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XmvROEYYps So why do you think that Indians are more than willing to help when there is a natural tragedy / terror attack but not when a single person/family meets with an accident?