What difference would it make? We treat poor and rich as equals... or should. Amputees are not treated any less than athletes.
These questions impose artifical beliefs as plausible theorems
These questions impose artifical beliefs as plausible theorems
I see you don't understand meritocracy. Amputees can physically do less than athletes, therefore they deserve worse food, worse housing, and worse medical care, unless they can offset this defect in some other way.
It's almost blasphemous to do otherwise; if God has seen fit to punish them, your offsetting of that punishment shows a prideful disapproval of God's plan. God has made His judgment of the amputee clear, so it's actually your duty to reinforce that judgement. God has given us dominion over this world, and the responsibility to maintain it; we can do that better with athletes, rather than people who are missing limbs. Or secularly, we collectively maintain the world's wealth through our individual contributions. The mean athlete contributes more, the mean amputee contributes less, and what goes around, should come around. Workers, not shirkers!
I like to think of it as the reverse golden rule. Accept unto yourself that which you would have done to others. If you're worth less, eat less.
The answers to these questions have real ramifications, treating them as artificial is how harm to real people happens.