The omission of good is no less reprehensible than the commission of evil.

The saying asserts a moral equivalence between sins of omission and sins of commission: failing to do what one ought can be as blameworthy as actively doing wrong. It pushes ethics beyond mere non-maleficence (“do no harm”) toward positive duty—helping, intervening, speaking up, or acting justly when circumstances call for it. The line also implies that moral character is measured not only by what we avoid, but by what we choose to do with our opportunities and responsibilities. In practical terms, it condemns passive complicity: allowing injustice, cruelty, or corruption to proceed unchallenged can make the bystander morally accountable.