We know a lot of homeless are emotionally and mentally challenged to the point of not being able to hold down a job and make ends meet. Many of these have or would have been institutionalized in years past against their will, and many such institutions were unpleasant and ill-equipped to provide true help. What is the divine perspective on allowing (or forcing) the mentally incapacitated to live on the street and burden society, versus providing for them an institution that can truly help but is likely costly?

We do not see this as an either-or proposition. Allowing people to have freedom even when they use it in a less than efficient manner, or even in a self-destructive way, it is really no one else’s business to tell them what to do—that is the essence of free will. The divine does not do this and humans should not do this to one another either. It is all well and good to provide suggestions to bring attention to public programs and services available to the needy and attempt to entice them to take advantage of what can be a blessing to have access to shelter and good nutrition, for example, particularly in family situations where children are involved who are quite dependent on the parents for their survival. But to mandate what to many homeless is a kind of incarceration does not serve them. It is an affront to their perception of dignity and the security they feel in being unencumbered and not contained within four walls provided by the state. Many homeless live adequately in developing the skills for survival under difficult and sometimes changing circumstances and in a sense this keeps them productively occupied caring for themselves in various ways, so their lives constitute a series of adventures, in effect. They might not be the lofty pursuits of the well-to-do, but a homeless person’s life might be much more exciting and in its own way more rewarding than someone who is well-off, bored with their own existence, and self-indulgent in ways that stultify and limit growth. So what we are pointing out is there are many measures that can be applied here as to who gains and who loses in a situation that appears to be a tragic misfortune on its surface but may have a silver lining. The issue of providing quality care is another matter. This is rarely done well by the government. It is much better in the hands of volunteers of charitable organizations who are spiritually based in particular. What most people need in their lives is love in some form. Acts of loving kindness provided by a shelter and its staff can be a godsend for many if there is a sincere sharing of heartfelt sympathy and compassion. There still needs to be improvement in the way governments manage the destitute who require supervision and assistance particularly because of mental or physical health impairment. Things are not as bad as prior era neglect and inadequacy but are still not ideal. Part of the problem is that the mainstream as a whole does not truly understand the homeless and in particular those with mental illness. There needs to be further progress to widen perspectives to see these people need a wide array of spiritual services in addition to seeing to their creature comforts. This is almost anathema to governments charged with helping the needy and is most unfortunate and will automatically limit their effectiveness as caregivers.