Don Cheadle Quotes

It was once said that the moral test of government is how that government treats those who are in the dawn of life, the children; those who are in the twilight of life, the elderly; and those who are in the shadows of life, the sick, the needy and the handicapped.

Once we know of atrocities we cannot remain silent, and knowledge inevitably leads to an urge to protect the innocent.

Societies should be judged by how they treat the weakest among them.

One needs to place the spotlight more on vulnerable groups of the population such as minorities, indigenous populations, migrants, and historically disadvantaged communities. Placing the spotlight on them brings their plight to the fore and enables the forging of a national consensus to act for their relief and protection.

History will judge societies and governments — and their institutions — not by how big they are or how well they serve the rich and the powerful, but by how effectively they respond to the needs of the poor and the helpless.

We will be judged as a society and as a culture by how we treated our meanest and most vulnerable citizens. If we keep going the way we're going, we will be judged very, very harshly - and sooner, perhaps, than we think.

As I have said before, our society cannot be truly prosperous until it respects the rights of the most vulnerable among us.

For my part, let me be clear: protecting those in society most at risk of harm, those crushed at the bottom of the heap, those who have been abused by the very people who should have looked after them, is, as home secretary, my job, but I also see it is as my moral duty.

If you see something that is not right, not fair, not just, you have a moral obligation to do something about it.

Every generation is confronted anew with the task not to look the other way when injustice occurs. ... Everyone is responsible for what he does and co-responsible for what he lets happen.

Because of my experience in Occupy, instead of asking the question, "Who will benefit from this system I'm implementing with the data?" I started to ask the question, "What will happen to the most vulnerable?" Or "Who is going to lose under this system? How will this affect the worst-off person?" Which is a very different question from "How does this improve certain people's lives?"

We have a high moral responsibility to be rational

Those commands of superiors which are contrary to our first duties are not to be obeyed.

There is not in all America a more dangerous trait than the deification of mere smartness unaccompanied by any sense of moral responsibility.

Suppose that I see a hungry child in the street, and I am able to offer the child some food. Am I morally culpable if I refuse to do so? Am I morally culpable if I choose not to do what I easily can about the fact that 1000 children die every hour from easily preventable disease, according to UNICEF? Or the fact that the government of my own "free and open society" is engaged in monstrous crimes that can easily be mitigated or terminated? Is it even possible to debate these questions?

All human governments are intended by God to do justice and mercy - to look after, in particular, the needs of the poor and disadvantaged.

One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.

Each individual in fact has moral responsibility for the acts which he personally performs; no one can be exempted from this responsibility, and on the basis of it everyone will be judged by God himself.

I think that - not just as a journalist but as a human being - I have the ethical responsibility to avoid actions that can harm innocent people.

Whatever is my right as a man is also the right of another; and it becomes my duty to guarantee as well as to possess.

A society can be judged by how it deals with its most vulnerable: the aged, the infirm, the disabled and the unborn.

I feel that it is our moral obligation to stand and to be courageous with these families, and particularly Cindy, that have become the conscience of this nation.

In the first place, the church can ask the state whether its actions are legitimate and in accordance with its character as state, i.e., it can throw the state back on its responsibilities. Secondly, it can aid the victims of state action. The church has an unconditional obligation to the victims of any ordering of society, even if they do not belong to the Christian community. The third possibility is not just to bandage the victims under the wheel, but to put a spoke in the wheel itself.

Extreme poverty anywhere is a threat to human security everywhere.

The law is a powerful thing but the law doesn't always change what's in people's hearts. And so all of us have an obligation to think about how we're treating other people.