> We don't have to deny them to anybody. Just to ask that those other countries it give them to their citizens, not having us give them to them. Well clearly t

> We don't have to deny them to anybody. Just to ask that those other countries it give them to their citizens, not having us give them to them. Well clearly the girl in Congo is born into a country that is not able/willing to grant her all the freedoms that Anderson is championing. We can blame Congo for her predicament all we want, but that doesn't change the fact that she's being deprived of the freedoms that we have the ability to grant. So why should we not grant her those freedoms? The whole point of foundational moral philosophies is that they should be applied universally. I'm very suspicious of moral philosophies that are applicable only to your in-group, and not your out-group. If the philosophy is so sound, why shouldn't it be applied towards everyone? At which point you find yourself inventing a whole other moral philosophy, in order to explain why XYZ people should be in your in-group and ABC people should not. And yet another moral philosophy which determines what is right/wrong when interacting with those in your out-group. And then another moral philosophy which explains why you need 3 different disparate moral philosophies, instead of just applying one of them universally.