British Priest says that "thou shal not steal" is more of a "guideline".

[jks9199]

There is a criminal defense of "necessity." It might justify, for example, breaking into a cabin when you're lost in the woods and in need of shelter, or stealing food to prevent starvation, or someone driving while suspended to deliver someone to the hospital. It's actually a pretty limited defense, and seldom applicable because there are usually legal means to obtain the needed aid or resources.

In the same way, morally one might be able to justify stealing under desperate circumstances -- but only if other less morally objectionable methods have failed. And, even then, one would expect that restitution be made as soon as possible.

 

[Archangel M]

And a defense of "necessity" would be an "affirmative defense" ("I did it but"). Which in plain terms means you still get arrested/charged and you have to .."prove it".

 

[Archangel M]

Did you just type that seriously? Who in here has that little icon with the rising BS flag?

My point proven eh?

 

[Senjojutsu]

Hello Tez3,

I didn’t mean to really insult the Brits as a whole, my apologies.
Since I have traveled over and trained with Englishmen and Scots during the past few years - I actually do follow UK issues and read (online) newspapers in England.

Also it somewhat goes beyond this one priest. During the past couple of decades certain “mainstream” religious figures in England have said some interesting things regarding secular public policy issues, i.e., having Western unilateral nuclear disarmament back in the 1980s but the Soviets would get to keep their toys? Then there are political issues of taxation policies, or immigration etc. that get organized religion input. Abortion and the Death Penalty are still huge issues over here with religious connections.

I thought I had balanced it by making fun of certain things within the overall American religious community. We have had several instances of bible-thumping “televangelists” caught ahhh, “with their pants down”. Quick America - name the teary minister behind this quote: I HAVE SINNED.

I was thinking when I was posting earlier – because it is the season – of quoting my favorite Christmastime exchange from a famous English author regarding this priest’s statement:

``Plenty of prisons,'' said the gentleman, laying down the pen again.

``And the Union workhouses?'' demanded Scrooge. ``Are they still in operation?''

``They are. Still,'' returned the gentleman, `` I wish I could say they were not.''

``The Treadmill and the Poor Law are in full vigour, then?'' said Scrooge.

``Both very busy, sir.''

``Oh! I was afraid, from what you said at first, that something had occurred to stop them in their useful course,'' said Scrooge. ``I'm very glad to hear it.''

``Under the impression that they scarcely furnish Christian cheer of mind or body to the multitude,'' returned the gentleman, ``a few of us are endeavouring to raise a fund to buy the Poor some meat and drink, and means of warmth. We choose this time, because it is a time, of all others, when Want is keenly felt, and Abundance rejoices. What shall I put you down for?''

``Nothing!'' Scrooge replied.

``You wish to be anonymous?''

``I wish to be left alone,'' said Scrooge. ``Since you ask me what I wish, gentlemen, that is my answer. I don't make merry myself at Christmas and I can't afford to make idle people merry. I help to support the establishments I have mentioned: they cost enough: and those who are badly off must go there.''

``Many can't go there; and many would rather die.''

``If they would rather die,'' said Scrooge, ``they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population".

Gawd – I love rereading this exchange and drinking eggnog at this time of year.

 

[Tez3]

Did you just type that seriously? Who in here has that little icon with the rising BS flag?

You saw the little smiley face right? What do you think? I think this demonstrates quite nicely my point that when written down it's hard to know what's in fun and what's not. You were saying I was over sensitive but now you've done exactly the same in thinking I've insulted you.

You should understand that the UK and Europe does like Americans you know. Ignore what the media, yours and ours says, Americans are liked, polititians in any shape, form or nationality aren't.

 

[CoryKS]

You saw the little smiley face right? What do you think? I think this demonstrates quite nicely my point that when written down it's hard to know what's in fun and what's not. You were saying I was over sensitive but now you've done exactly the same in thinking I've insulted you.

I never thought you insulted me, and I wasn't getting sensitive about it. Just wondered if you were expressing an honestly-held belief. Now I know.

You should understand that the UK and Europe does like Americans you know. Ignore what the media, yours and ours says, Americans are liked, polititians in any shape, form or nationality aren't.

Yes I know they do tell us they like us, usually as a preface to listing all the things about American culture they don't like. Guess it's a "hate the sin, love the sinner" sort of thing.

 

[Tez3]

I never thought you insulted me, and I wasn't getting sensitive about it. Just wondered if you were expressing an honestly-held belief. Now I know.




Yes I know they do tell us they like us, usually as a preface to listing all the things about American culture they don't like. Guess it's a "hate the sin, love the sinner" sort of thing.

The media will do that but nobody asks 'proper' people what they think. People don't think an very often about America or Americans as I'm sure you don't think about us that often, we have lives unlike the media Tristans and the Chattering Classes. We are all sensible people who get on with our lives and don't have time to waste on 'hating' others (other than the French as Sukerkin will tell you lol). The media distort things as this post shows, a vicar preaches a sermon on something which I gather other Christian philosophers have considered and it gets distorted into 'a vicar says it's okay to steal', people read that, start chuntering and hey presto the press has done it's job.
What do we think about Americans? enough to do this for them.
http://www.rafnews.co.uk/readstory.asp?storyID=385 Two American soldiers died immediately in the explosion but 12 were saved by this man's actions. Americans have and also will be regarded here as 'the cousins'.

Senjojutso, the internet and the written word on it cause things to be taken the wrong way, misunderstandings. No worries now, all explained, forgiven and forgotten!

 

[Archangel M]

So your problem is that it says "British Priest"???

 

[Sukerkin]

Will you stop poking the fire :lol:? Let it go and move on. It's the season of good will and forgiveness after all.

 

[Ken Morgan]

Will you stop poking the fire :lol:? Let it go and move on. It's the season of good will and forgiveness after all.

Look, look a Brit telling us what to do!!!

 

[Sukerkin]

ROFL. {Basil Fawlty} Right, that's it ... go and fetch your sword, sirrah! We shall settle this like gentlemen .

 

[Bob Hubbard]

You know, you guys keep poking the Brits they might revoke our Independence.

 

[CoryKS]

You know, you guys keep poking the Brits they might revoke our Independence.

Seems to me like we're doing a fine job of that all by ourselves.

 

[Tez3]

So your problem is that it says "British Priest"???

Well if you want to split hairs lol he's actually an English vicar! A very distinct species all of it's own.

I don't have a problem as the gentleman who made the post apologised very nicely, he didn't mean to cause a kerfuffle.

 

[MJS]

If it came to starving to death or stealing, than yes, a case could be made that stealing is less wrong than dying of starvation. That does not mean "Thou shalt not steal" is a guideline, it only means that given the choice, stealing is less of a moral offense than allowing someone to die of starvation. I doubt very much that there are very many in the USA or Great Britain who shoplift do so because they are on the brink of dying any moment if they don't steal that food.

Of course it doesn't make it right, I merely wrote stealing to prevent starvation is less of a moral offense than allowing someone to starve to death. I also wrote that I doubted very many who steal are really on the brink of starvation in either Great Britain or the USA.

Yes, I see what you're saying...stealing to prevent death vs stealing for other means....yes, the lesser of the 2 evils is obvious. I'm simply wondering though, as to why someone would have to steal. If there are, and as I said in my post, I am not sure, but if there are food banks, shelters, etc that'll offer meals for free, in addition to assistance from the state, Govt., etc., then why steal in the first place?

As for people who shoplift for the sole purpose of eating....I'd say its for personal gain, ie: some dirtbag feels that they deserve a 60in TV, so they walk into the local Walmart, grab one and leave, or an addiction, ie: drugs. Baby formula is something that is a hot item. Its usually sold to smaller mom and pop type shops for quick cash.

 

[MJS]

American bashing isn't a European pastime, ignoring America is

Hmm..careful now....for the same reason you get offended every time someone starts a thread such as this, or every time someone slights MMA...well, I think you can see the point I'm trying to make here.

 

[Sukerkin]

Free Christmas sale - thicker skins for all.

 

[Joab]

Yes, I see what you're saying...stealing to prevent death vs stealing for other means....yes, the lesser of the 2 evils is obvious. I'm simply wondering though, as to why someone would have to steal. If there are, and as I said in my post, I am not sure, but if there are food banks, shelters, etc that'll offer meals for free, in addition to assistance from the state, Govt., etc., then why steal in the first place?

I did write that I think there are very few people in the USA or Great Britain who steal because they are about to starve to death. In the USA, if you don't have enough food to stay alive you don't know where to go to get free food, it's out there. At least everywhere I have lived in the USA has been like this, and articles I've read seem to indicate this is reality, don't know about Great Britain. I do think the Bishops' approach is totally wrong, he should be encouraging acts of charity to prevent such a drastic situation from occuring, not stating its ok to steal if your about to starve to death, but do it from a large supermarket, not a small business.

 

[celtic_crippler]

You know... I personally don't fault someone for doing what they have to in order to survive but you must consider that road travels both ways.

Taking from another puts them in a similar circumstance, so then it becomes a matter of who's going to benefit; you or them.

When it boils down to the most simple of survival rules, me or you... I'm going to have to go with "me."

It's easy to be civilized and charitable when your welfare isn't at stake.

Where is the ethical line drawn when you steal a loaf of bread from a family that only has a loaf of bread to eat, in order to feed your family? Is there a "right" and a "wrong" there?

It's a catch 22 of sorts. You don't fault them for trying because you would do the same, but you have to protect what's yours in order to not find yourself in that same situation.

 

[Joab]

You know... I personally don't fault someone for doing what they have to in order to survive but you must consider that road travels both ways.

Taking from another puts them in a similar circumstance, so then it becomes a matter of who's going to benefit; you or them.

When it boils down to the most simple of survival rules, me or you... I'm going to have to go with "me."

It's easy to be civilized and charitable when your welfare isn't at stake.

Where is the ethical line drawn when you steal a loaf of bread from a family that only has a loaf of bread to eat, in order to feed your family? Is there a "right" and a "wrong" there?

It's a catch 22 of sorts. You don't fault them for trying because you would do the same, but you have to protect what's yours in order to not find yourself in that same situation.

To be fair to the Bishop, he did not advocate stealing from a small business much less a family no matter how dire the circumstance, only a large supermarket. There are costs there too. Up until last week I worked at a Walmart. That specific store had an audit that showed over a million dollars off in one year, much of which came from shop lifting. None of the shop lifters that were caught were on the brink of dying from starvation. That loss has to be made up and that is often made up in higher prices, in the USA the average family pays over $400 a year more due to shoplifting according to a report on CNN.

If it comes down to dying of starvation or stealing the Bishop may have a point, but as I have written before, the focus should be on keeping it from getting that bad, not suggesting that stealing can be a less moral evil than allowing someone to starve to death. Food banks, meals on wheels and the like are of course a far better solution than stealing, and having jobs available that pay a living wage is of course the most desireable solution to hunger.