The word "proper" implies an absolutist or religious stance, which may have no logical foundation in daily human inter-relationships.
I didn't mean to imply a religious stance by using the word "proper". I mean to ask who should
we extend moral consideration to.
If you have qualms about an absolutist stance, would you be willing to answer "How do you and only you do decide who to give moral consideration and why?"
The comment regarding morality
posing a psychological challenge to self
is very interesting. Do you think that our ability to contemplate "consequences of of their actions" that you say is responsible for this conflict predisposes people to a utilitarian ethic?
And with reference to Maslow's hierarchy of needs, "moral considerations" may simply be an intellectual pursuit for those with the luxury of time on their hands as a result of the material wealth they control.
I think that I made a poor word choice in my original post by using "moral considerations". What I mean is not
how should we contemplate morality, but how should we practice it. What I was attempting to ask is more along the lines of "Who should we behave morally toward?".
Who's interests should we consider when we make ethical decisions?