Starvation And Theft

[N/A Gone]

What would Christ do to the starving homeless man that steals bread to eat?

Would he blame him?

Do the ends never justify the means?

Should we be judged for not providing?

How does the principle of double effect fit?

Just some questions I have been thinking of lately.

Edited February 17, 2010 by Revprodeji

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='Revprodeji' date='16 February 2010 - 11:37 PM' timestamp='1266381427' post='2058189']
What would Christ do to the starving homeless man that steals bread to eat?

Would he blame him?

Do the ends never justify the means?

Should we be judged for not providing?

How does the principle of double effect fit?

Just some questions I have been thinking of lately.
[/quote]

First, did Starving homeless man fail to first ask as many people as he could? He couldn't beg a couple bucks?

Second, did Starving homeless man offer to work for anyone, or is he literally passing out from hunger?

Universal destination of goods. "This is the case in obvious and urgent necessity when the only way to provide for immediate, essential needs (food, shelter, clothing . . .) is to put at one's disposal and use the property of others." Catechism, 2408.

Discover the definition of stealing, before you go into your other questions. Stealing isn't merely taking an item from another person.

~Sternhauser

Edited February 17, 2010 by Sternhauser

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Revprodeji' date='17 February 2010 - 12:37 AM' timestamp='1266381427' post='2058189']
What would Christ do to the starving homeless man that steals bread to eat?

[/quote]
He would take him out for a good meal, and help him find a job.

[Veridicus]

This query reminds me of Jean Valjean. I'm not sure how Thomas Aquinas would handle this, although I like to defer to the Principle of Double Effect for its simple and efficient leveling of moral quagmires. There does exist a point in the process of starvation where the frontal lobe ceases functioning correctly...that is the 'decision-making' and 'ethical evaluating' part of the human brain is essentially defective. The fear of death due to starvation (or the psychological effects of a loved one starving) could be viewed as something which assuages the gravity and culpability of stealing. Perhaps stealing for the immediate necessity of self-preservation (or the preservation of an innocent in immediate danger) is similar to killing an aggressor in self-defense?


[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='16 February 2010 - 11:18 PM' timestamp='1266383885' post='2058200']
He would take him out for a good meal, and help him find a job.
[/quote]
This reminds me of that scene with the homeless man in the movie Groundhog Day for some reason.

Edited February 17, 2010 by Veridicus

[aalpha1989]

[quote name='Veridicus' date='17 February 2010 - 12:23 AM' timestamp='1266384192' post='2058201']
This query reminds me of Jean Valjean. I'm not sure how Thomas Aquinas would handle this, although I like to defer to the Principle of Double Effect for its simple and efficient leveling of moral quagmires. There does exist a point in the process of starvation where the frontal lobe ceases functioning correctly...that is the 'decision-making' and 'ethical evaluating' part of the human brain is essentially defective. The fear of death due to starvation (or the psychological effects of a loved one starving) could be viewed as something which assuages the gravity and culpability of stealing. Perhaps stealing for the immediate necessity of self-preservation (or the preservation of an innocent in immediate danger) is similar to killing an aggressor in self-defense?
[/quote]

That seems like a slippery slope to me. Of course there'd be mitigating circumstances, but I don't think I can believe that the action could be compared to killing an aggressor in self-defense. The level of guilt also depends on what is being stolen and who it is being stolen from.

[Veridicus]

[quote name='aalpha1989' date='16 February 2010 - 11:25 PM' timestamp='1266384357' post='2058204']
That seems like a slippery slope to me. Of course there'd be mitigating circumstances, but I don't think I can believe that the action could be compared to killing an aggressor in self-defense. The level of guilt also depends on what is being stolen and who it is being stolen from.
[/quote]
I completely agree. It is a slippery slope. But at the same time, at some point during starvation you are going to lose control and find something to eat if you are surrounded by people who have plenty of food. I would prefer someone more educated than myself determine the morality of this. I just can't imagine that stealing bread for self-preservation is of the same gravity as stealing a shirt from a store just because you want it.

[aalpha1989]

[quote name='Veridicus' date='17 February 2010 - 12:29 AM' timestamp='1266384570' post='2058207']
I completely agree. It is a slippery slope. But at the same time, at some point during starvation you are going to lose control and find something to eat if you are surrounded by people who have plenty of food. I would prefer someone more educated than myself determine the morality of this. I just can't imagine that stealing bread for self-preservation is of the same gravity as stealing a shirt from a store just because you want it.
[/quote]

No it's not, which is why I mentioned mitigating circumstances. I do disagree that you will lose control. Whatever neurology has discovered about the brain, it will never understand why certain stimuli affect the brain in certain ways, because it will never concede that man is also spiritual. I don't think it is a far stretch to say that someone extremely disciplined and firm in their faith would never "lose control" while starving.

[aalpha1989]

[quote name='aalpha1989' date='17 February 2010 - 12:41 AM' timestamp='1266385298' post='2058209']
No it's not, which is why I mentioned mitigating circumstances. I do disagree that you will lose control. Whatever neurology has discovered about the brain, it will never understand why certain stimuli affect the brain in certain ways, because it will never concede that man is also spiritual. I don't think it is a far stretch to say that someone extremely disciplined and firm in their faith would never "lose control" while starving.
[/quote]

I should clarify about neurologists. In my experience they view everything as an entirely natural phenomenon and leave no room for any mental activity outside of what has been defined by Darwinian evolution. I like Lewis' simple arguments about why mankind's actions (but particularly his morals) are not defined by instinct. If a man sees another burning, his instinct is to run away and save himself (which would be in keeping with Darwinism). His morals command that he try to save the other, and he very often does.

Neurologists could say that these morals are culturally conditioned (or even admit that they come from a higher power), but in their research they go too far in defining human thought and behavior. They generally view everything as a biological process, but personally I don't think they've explained anything. They do very well at showing processes within the brain, and I'll give them their work on simple biological processes necessary for survival. I will not give them more complicated moral situations.

[Winchester]

Avoiding starvation doesn't seem like a free choice, to me.

[add]

[quote name='Revprodeji' date='17 February 2010 - 12:37 AM' timestamp='1266381427' post='2058189']
What would Christ do to the starving homeless man that steals bread to eat?

Would he blame him?

Do the ends never justify the means?

Should we be judged for not providing?

How does the principle of double effect fit?

Just some questions I have been thinking of lately.
[/quote]

(pass) go and go directly to "catholic charities", no one need go hungry or steal or suffer this way.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[b]CCC 2408[/b]
The seventh commandment forbids theft, that is, usurping another's property against the reasonable will of the owner. There is no theft if consent can be presumed or if refusal is contrary to reason and the universal destination of goods. This is the case in obvious and urgent necessity when the only way to provide for immediate, essential needs (food, shelter, clothing...) is to put at one's disposal and use the property of others.

[CatherineM]

My first question would be who he stole the bread from. Did he steal it from a fat, rich man, or a poor pregnant woman.

[Slappo]

[quote name='CatherineM' date='17 February 2010 - 08:45 AM' timestamp='1266425127' post='2058342']
My first question would be who he stole the bread from. Did he steal it from a fat, rich man, or a poor pregnant woman.
[/quote]

It isn't theft at all if it falls under the universal goods rule which was quoted above.

Theft is always wrong, for a starving man to take food to survive is not theft.



The key is the man has to be starving not "feel really hungry." (by feel really hungry I mean... he didn't bring a couple bucks for lunch to work today, so he has to skip a meal or take someone elses food)

Edited February 17, 2010 by Slappo

[Lilllabettt]

I think its a sin that there are people who starve.

[BibleReader]

"Do Not Steal"

"Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or drink; or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more important than food, and the body more important than clothes? Look at the birds of the air; they do not sow or reap or store away in barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not much more valuable than they?"

"Be faithful, even to the point of death"

"he overcame him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony; they did not love their lives so much as to shrink from death."

We are told not to worry, and through faith God will provide, and we are called not to sin even to death.