19 ms·

But for the example of the recently released prisoner he cites, I'm not sure which obvious ones he's failing to consider. Begging and dying would seem to both

• pbhjpbhj 17y ago
  As someone else pointed out the Church holds that the right to live is greater than the right to [individual?] ownership of property. This has some interesting consequences which I'll enjoy meating out with friends in the Church in the next few weeks - very apposite. Begging, agreed. Though when I look at it hard and consider that begging demands the poor to give up their dignity then it reinforces in me that we should endeavour not to leave people in a position where it is ever necessary. I think just the fact that so many are now considering the position of the poor facing moral choices of theft or starvation makes this an excellent sermon.
  • hugh_ 17y ago
    I think just the fact that so many are now considering the position of the poor facing moral choices of theft or starvation makes this an excellent sermon. When was the last time anybody actually managed to starve to death in Great Britain? Great Britain is already a welfare state. It's easy to get paid for not working. If you fall through the cracks of that system there are dozens of charities devoted to helping those in genuine need. In addition, there's a beggar on every street corner. Oh, and there's always the Church, which really should be working on feeding the hungry itself (perhaps by reducing its own gold-plated candelabra budget) instead of sending 'em to knock over Tesco's. Finally, if you somehow manage to be completely unable to find food anywhere, and you haven't eaten for days and you're actually in danger of dying of starvation, all you need to do is go to hospital, where they'll say "hey, this guy is dying of starvation" and give you free food and medical treatment. In conclusion, dying for lack of food in modern Britain is very, very difficult.
    • pbhjpbhj 17y ago
      When I said "not to leave people in a position ..." I wasn't really thinking of people in the UK. If you can walk into hospital then you're not going to be treated for hunger, if you can't then you'll possibly die where you sleep. I'll agree, in winter in the UK you'll die from exposure before you die technically from starvation. Yes, in my city the best (in fact only) street work is paid for by the local Church - they do a rolling program of food/shelter moving between a few of the city centre church buildings. "Finally, if you somehow manage to be completely unable to find food anywhere" Isn't the point kinda that you can walk into this huge building, nearby and full of food, 20% of which will probably just be binned, and help yourself?? [I'm really not a strong advocate of theft!]
• anigbrowl 17y ago
  Begging in public is a crime in many jurisdictions, though one that tends to result in simply being chased off by the police rather than arrest. I don't think anyone is morally required to lie down and die if they've exhausted all legal avenues for basic survival. Indeed, the cost to society of someone dying from starvation/exposure (in terms of autopsy, administration and other expenses) would seem to be quite a bit higher than the economic loss of some food. So I would suggest that stealing sufficient food for survival (rather than for profit) is more morally acceptable than passively dying.
• cabalamat 17y ago
  moral acceptability != rationality.
• ratsbane 17y ago
  Allowing those around you to die for lack of a minimum amount of food or shelter does not seem to me to be more morally acceptable than stealing.