The most recent installment of Slate's advice column, "Dear Prudie," fielded a most disturbing reader inquiry titled, "My girlfriend won’t donate to Harvey victims because some of them voted for Trump." 

The question follows: 

Q. [Dear Prudie] I come from the Houston area and have been heartbroken about the damage and scenes from Harvey. I decided to donate $250 and asked my girlfriend if she would match it. She agreed, and then when I asked if she had given to the Red Cross or someone else, I learned that she donated to the Humane Society. I know she’s absolutely nuts about animals, especially our own dogs, but to give to animals when people are in trouble seems heartless to me. She’s much more politically active than I am, and I finally asked if she did that to avoid the possibility of giving money to someone who voted for Trump, and she admitted that was one of the reasons. I think that’s awful, and we’ve been fighting about it ever since. She thinks as a gay woman I should see her side, but I just can’t. There are good people everywhere, and she went out of her way to avoid helping. We’ve been fighting about this ever since. Who is right?

Thankfully, even a Slate advice columnist had the wherewithal and a functioning moral compass enough to know that the "girlfriend" in question acted in an unconscionable fashion."

"It took me a few times to parse this letter, because at first I thought your girlfriend was somehow concerned that someone in the Red Cross might have voted for Trump, but it sounds like she is actually reluctant to support human flood victims on the off chance that they may have voted for him, which is nonsensical and unconscionable," writes Prudie in response. 

"'As a society, we should help victims of natural disasters' is a complete sentence that does not require additional clauses, addenda, or stipulations. This is worth fighting with your girlfriend about, and you should strongly oppose her bizarre moral calculus."

The author concluded her response by sharing details on how readers can help Harvey victims via the Red Cross. 

While this might be an extreme example, we have before seen progressives feign moral superiority to such a degree that they actually believe those who don't share their politics deserve fates worse than death. In this case, we think it's time for the person who asked this question to have a break-up talk.