Conflicted

    How can one's happiness derive from another's misery? Why do you feel entitled to joy while others are suffering? For hundreds of years philosophers have argued over the sacrifice of one for the benefit of thousands. If the smartest minds have debated over the answer there surly is no one correct solution, maybe even no right answer at all.
    The people of Omelas are said to live a bountiful and cheerful life even though they are aware of the decrepit and sore-infested child living in the dark cell of the basement. They may even try to convince themselves that their sense of helplessness should not encompass sorrow because they appreciate the sacrifice of the child and therefore are able to be compassionate in their actions. They also may argue that the child would not be capable of happiness and joy after so many years locked away, and that he has become numb to the pain and suffering. These people are lying to themselves. The citizens of Omelas are creating excuses in an effort to subdue the feeling of pity and sympathy for this innocent child. Trust your gut. If upon first glance you recognize the horror of the situation, there is a good chance you have encountered a horrific situation. The passage of time acts as a band-aid attempting to cover the festering wound in the town. The undeserving child lives a cold and lonely life while the citizens attempt to utilize ignorance as their bliss.
   Those that comprehend the atrocity of the situation and leave the town are no better than those who stay. It could even be argued that the ones who leave are worse because they comprehend the pain and suffering of the child, yet instead of acting upon their instincts, they flee the city in an effort to physically and mentally leave behind their conflict. Running from problems never solves the situation and can in fact make it worse. Those that leave are making the child's sacrifice less valuable because it benefits fewer people. Having no reaction is heartless, but getting up and leaving is just as poor a decision if not worse.
    If I were living in Omelas I would not live in blissful ignorance nor leave my problems behind, instead I would justify the situation for those involved. It would be nearly impossible to convince all the citizens to willingly vacate the city based on their morals, but it would be manageable to identify those that agree with the philosophy that the suffering of one for the betterment of many is justified. Those who do not approve of this belief must leave the city immediately, for this is the principle upon which the city revolves. From the citizens remaining, a raffle would be drawn between all of the adults to determine which of them would take the boy's position. When a number is pulled, the boy would be liberated from his cell and the newly chosen sacrifice would assume the position. It is unethical for a group to victimize one naive member for the collective benefit. However, if that member is confident in their beliefs, they may understandably put themselves in harms way to support their ideals. The happy remainders can lead blissful lives because chance rendered them lucky, but they still made a sacrifice by risking their own life for the sake of their belief. One moral solution for the paradox in Omelas is to have the sacrifice be a person who believes in the fundamentals of the city; any other sacrifice is an innocent victim. The citizens must demonstrate support for their beliefs in order to live happy and blissful lives.