Would You Steal Bread to Feed Your Family

Thread Status:

Not open for further replies.

1. I've never actually had this problem personally but several of my school rules and minor laws of my town even have made me ponder the circumstances under which I'll break a rule or even a law. Because I do respect order but I easily lose tolerance with the ridiculous. For example, where I live has a curfew on those under eighteen. Meaning, legally I could stay all night at a boy's house but he can't drive me home after 12PM. I have a problem with that and therefore only respected that law when it bothered the boy's parents who I respected far more(I've never even seen a police officer enforce it.) Now I know this doesn't have quite the moral implications of the subject but I'll get to that. I'm just establishing my own opinion. Also we're all familliar with jay-walking. Cross-walks simply aren't aways in the right places. At my scool they're doing construction and the payphones don't work often. There is a rule about using the school's regular phones basically consisting of the word "never." But they did not supply me with the proper facilities to follow this rule reasonably, facilities they are responsible for keeping up or at least providing alternatives for. Now the school librarian is kind enough to let me use the phone if I need to but he was not in. Going to another rule. You're not allowed in the rooms after school if there are no teachers. The library was technically closed. But the door was unlocked so I took the oppertunity to use the phone. The only thing I felt bad about was my inability to ask the librarian, who I have great respect for, for permission. I felt no wrong, however, in disobeying the rule. We may shrug these things off but they are laws. So why break them? Are we evil people if we do?

   Personally I don't think so. I think some laws exist because of a general lack of common sense in some people. I, of course, agree that killing people is wrong. The fact that we need a law to say it frightens me. I know not everyone is good but that presents this moral dilemma with all laws. Is there ever a right time to break them?

   Leading to the subject. A lot of resturants will throw unused food away and are honestly not allowed to donate it to those who need it. I've never been put in the situation where I would need to do this but I cannot say I would condemn a person who took food destined to be wasted rather than nourish those who need it. With all the starving people I see no ethical justification for this. Yet when can we stop using our own sense in laws? When must we step down and allow society to govern us? Or should we ever think for ourselves at all? You don't have to stick to talking about these laws and rules by the way. If you have one that's equally questionable that fine. But try to focus on the general topic of when it's right to follow laws rather than on specific laws themselves.

2. Yes I would ignore the curfew unless I felt it unsafe to be out after midnight because I dont feel they should be telling me when to be home. I'll be 18 in June and won't have stupid things like this to wrry about.

   Yes, I jaywalk at times.

   Yes, if the payphones didn't work and I needed to make a call I'd use the regular phones.

   Usually I'd stay out of the classrooms because why would I want to be in there, but if I needed to use the phone, then I'd walk in and use it.

   Yes I would steal a loaf of bread if I was starving.

   You need to always think for yourself. Follow the rules when you can, but if you absolutely have to brekak it and it's just a minor law then go ahead.

3. You bring up a good point, Teniel.

   GENERALLY SPEAKING, laws are to be obeyed. If you have a problem with one, do something peaceful about it. Write to your Rep or Senator, or organize a peaceful protest. I'm thinking I should do that more.

   Sometimes, laws have to be bended for extraodinary circumstances, or unusual ones, at least. For example, Congressmen/women can break traffic laws to get to the Capitol to cast votes.

   As for morality and laws, I think they should be separated as much as possible. Morals should seldom, if ever, get in the way, because everyone's perception of morality is different. Granted, there are some things that the overwhelming majority of the people agree on (i.e. First-degree murder is wrong/illegal most of the time) but to let "morals" guide us may lead us into the less effective course. We need to do what will benefit the country, not necessarily benefit our feelings.

   As for your overarching question: Laws, for most cases, should be followed. If you have a problem with one, do something about it yes, but don't habitually break it.

4. Laws are created by pharisees (lawyers, legalists, etc.) for the sake of throwing their weight around because they like to bully people. Order makes us weak. Therefore, destroy it.

   Actually, I should elaborate on that. Order makes the people weak and the government strong, which is the opposite of how things are supposed to be. Chaos is when society is constructed from the bottum up rather than the top down. Chaos is how things are supposed to be. Sic semper tyrannis. Chaos is freedom. The South will rise again.

   Inflict tyrannicide.

5. I pay very little attention to the law. I follow my own morals, not the law. The law just happens to coincide with my morals most of the time.

6. All interesting points. I agree with Kuna_Tiori that I (and anyone else) who habitually breaks a rule should fight for the reversal of that rule in the very least. However, I am guilty to not doing this I'll admit. The reason for this complaceny, while also wrong, is another problem with rules such as this. The lack of proper punishment or enforcement. I have a hard time recognizing something as a standard expected of me when it's not habitually enforced. For example, there is a very simple dress code at my school. No showing of undergarments. Shirt must cover top of pants, sleeves must cover shoulders. I put my support behind this. Yet does this prevent me from seeing the thong of some girl at a lab table in front of me or knowing the colors of the underpants of practically every girl in my homeroom? Unfortunately not. This, for me, establishes a deep disgust with the system in general and my respect of their abilities. While the lack of enforcement does not necessarily justify the breaking of rules it does explain my apathy at fighting for a change. A rule's survival is in it's enforcement and I am forced to see it as a non-entity if it is not.
   

7. I have an idea for a dress code (for school or whatnot): black cargo pants with oversized belt loops; black sleeveless undershirt (waist-length, untucked); black long-sleeve double-breasted shield-front shirt (waist-length, untucked, and with nickel buttons); black underwear; black socks; black Sam Browne belt (those cool belts cops wear with all the stuff on them except without the stuff - smooth, with nickel buckle); black leather M-65 field jacket with spiked epaulets; black leather full-finger unvented driving gloves with knuckle-holes and open backs with snaps instead of sissy Velcro; and knee-high engineer boots with oversized nickel buckles.

8. Laws exist to keep the masses in line. That does not mean every individual should have to obey them at all times. Going back to the title, I would indeed steal to feed my family if we were starving, the same way I would be willing to break any law if my own sense of morality demanded it. Since the law is made for cookie-cutter situations and can't anticipate every eventuality that may occur, it has to be discarded sometimes. For example, what if you had a gun when you were on the LIRR the day the massacre occurred and you saw the shooter about to pull his gun? Wouldn't you have a right to shoot him if you could get him before he hurt anyone else?

9. It's there to serve you, and if at any time a certain law isn't serving you, you should break it.

   i agree, basically. i'm glad that laws exist and i'm glad that some of them are enforced. i'm glad that i can walk down the street without worrying too much about getting shot. but if there's something that i think i should be able to do, the law isn't going to really enter into my thinking except on a practical level (not wanting to deal with the risk issues involved). the law is a tool that most people should use as they see fit.

   however, on a practical note, if you're doing something, and you know it's against the law, and you get caught and there's no way to get out of it, you really can't complain about it.

10. Laws exist to be followed, and usually they are there for a reason. But there are certain instance where breaking the law should be done.

    If my family was starving then I'm sure I would steal some food. But I've never been in that situation so I can't tell you right off hand for sure what I'd do.

11. 
    First off, I would get a job to buy the loaf of bread. But if came down to stealing, yes I would.

12. HavocHound, why aren't you US president yet? What a wonderful plan!
    But in all seriousness, I find it perfectly acceptable to break the law if it is necessary. Laws are in place to keep us in line, but if you must cut corners occassionally to keep yourself afloat, then steal away. In the words of a famous mobster:
    If you had to steal a loaf of bread to feed your family, you would right?
    Well, if you had a huge family, would you steal a truckload of bread?
    What if your family didn't like bread, they liked... Cigarettes, would it be wrong to steal a truckload of cigarettes to keep them afloat?
    Okay, maybe a bad example, but you get the idea. Providing that nobody gets too badly hurt (eg your baker loses $2, big deal), then it's all good!

13. Yes, I absolutely would steal the bread. Better some well-off store owner loses out on a buck than for my family to die. Heck, to save my family, I'd probably kill for it. But, only if I knew I wouldn't have to continue to do so to keep them alive.

14. Going back to the title, yes, I would definitely steal a loaf of bread to feed my starving family. However, I must add that I would be willing to go to jail after that if only the law would be able to ensure that they would consequently not starve after that.

    I feel that laws are in place to guide the general public and to show why major criminal offences are incorrect. However, at many a time, they are unnecessary should we have moral integrity and enough common sense to get on in the real world.

    On one of the most important roads in Singapore, where I live, almost everybody jaywalks across the road when the red light for cars comes on. By this, I mean that the entire road, and not just the pedestrian crossing, becomes the path which people walk on. Is this lawfully wrong? I don't know; the policemen never catch us. I think that it has come to a point where some of the most obvious and acceptable breaking of laws is all right simply because it is absolutely harmless, and in fact common-sensical.

15. I follow the law. Why, you may ask. Well, why not? Seriously, and I know I may sound like a bastard for saying this: but how hard is it to *buy* a loaf of bread? I've talked to beggars in several cities, and it's been made quite clear to me that sitting on a corner with a cup collecting coins you can make quite a few dollars in a day. Not a living wage, but certainly enough for food. The problem is that many people instead spend it on drugs or alcohol to take their minds off their problems. I'd like to say that if I was in a situation where my family was starving, I'd be able to beg or work enough to afford a little food. Of course, life being what it was, if it was truly life and death for me or anyone I loved, then there's nothing I would not do to ensure they survived, and the consequences would have to come later.

16. I would break a legal code if it meant following a moral code -- i.e. stealing something to keep people from dying. This could be seen as the ends justify the means, and I agree I'm a little sketchy on it myself, but I see one as legal and one as moral.

    I see it this way: There are alot of US laws I don't agree with -- abortion for example. I think it is morally wrong. However, I do not think drinking under the age of 21, as long as it's done responsibly, is immoral. I have yet to find that in the Bible anywhere. Therefore I am willing to break the law and have a sip of a wine cooler since I do not believe it is morally wrong for me to do so. I would also pass up my legal right to have an abortion since I believe that abortion, while legal, is against my beliefs.

    Please remember, this is not an abortion thread, and I am not actually as anti-abortion as I sound in this thread, I am just trying to show how morals and laws can be two different things.

17. One should use common sense and their own moral code. Break the law by taking a loaf of bread to feed your starving family, no contest. In some states in the US, sodonomy is illigal. Does that mean homosexuals should avoid having sex just to stay within the limits of the law? Rediculous. I'll break the law if i don't agree with that law and that law is in my way.

18. I will follow the law as long as I think the law is just.

    Though another good reason to follow the law is because of the law enforcers.

19. i break the law constantly, like said above, if i feel it's a ridiculous one.

    stealing bread is a little different bc i do believe stealing is indeed wrong. however, extenuating circumstances should be taken into consideration i guess.

    i can't ever feel like stealing a loaf of bread for your starving family is that terrible after seeing Les Miserables LOL

20. Well being a Muslim and all I'd like to talk about Islamic law (Sharia'ah).

    Sharia'ah states that people can do things that are illegal or against the rules if they must. This means not only illegal in a social sense (stealing/killing) but also things illegal in a religious sense (not doing things Islam tells you to do- like praying). For example if one is sick, travelling, or has a laborious job and can't fast then it is okay- he can make his fast up later by fasting or feeding a poor person. If someone steals some bread to feed his family than obviously he has every right to do so. As a matter of fact the often-publicised hand-chopping laws in Arab countries very rarely are carried out and when they are the person is given a very fair trial. Of course whether or not you really need to do something- your actual intentions in an illegal act are simply between you and God. Islam tries to be as flexible as it can to accomodate people, to not be imposing, and to be a religion that can actually be followed easily.

21. "Well...it depends. It would if it had Jelly on it.... Reverand LoveJoy, the Stolen Cable TV episode of the SIMPSONS.

22. I'd steal two loaves and a pound of butter.

23. I believe that civilization cannot work without the RULE OF LAW.

    Quick example: let's say 20 people, stranded on a deserted island, decide to live by democracy. Rather than one man bullying all the others, the castaways write laws by majority rule.

    If some law passes, 11-9, and the 9 people who voted against it decide to break it (they don't like, they didn't vote for it, and they found it inconvenient), then we're back to rule by the strong, commonly called tyranny.

    And make no mistake: the chaos HavocHound espouses leads to a tyrrany much worse than the rule of law found in democratic civilization. The VAST majority of people would live in the nightmare Hobbes described in Leviathan:

    [blockquote]No arts; no letters; no society; and which is worst of all, continual fear and danger of violent death; and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.[/blockquote]

    Are there exceptions to the Rule of Law? Sure: obedience to a Higher Law, the Moral Law. We may be compelled to break a law if obeying it is morally wrong, but that doesn't excuse us breaking laws out of mere convenience.

    All of us do this to a small degree, going 70 on the Interstate when the speed limit is 65, etc. But that doesn't mean it's right.

    Ariana Lang, there certainly isn't any biblical commandment about underage drinking, but there IS this:

    [blockquote]He said to them, "Then render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's." - Luke 20:25 (RSV)[/blockquote]

    (See also Matthew 22:21 and Mark 12:17.)

    While there's no Biblical command about underage drinking, the Bible DOES teach to obey the government as long as its laws are not immoral. The laws about alcohol aren't immoral, so you SHOULD obey that law.

    Anyway, the American Revolution was likely one such morally permissible exception: the colonists rebelled because of their devotion to a higher prinicple of "consent of the governed." Oskar Schindler's actions were also the RIGHT actions: his lies to the Nazi police state saved the lives of over 1,100 Jews.

    But is stealing bread to feed your family equally moral? It is on ONLY one condition: if there truly is no alternative that is legal or more moral.

    Mastadge is right about begging being a good alternative. And even if begging AND stealing are both illegal, begging is more moral than stealing, since it involves the consent of the people who are essentially subsidizing your loaf of bread.

    It seems to me that those who steal rather than beg are letting their pride get in their way. They need to swallow their pride and do the right thing.

    So, with the rare and extraordinary exception of begging being impossible, stealing to feed your family is probably impermissible.

24. I disagree. Civilization can work without the rule of law. It's not likely to, especially when it gets big, but it can. And Bubba, you talk about RULE OF THE LAW, by which you seem to mean DEMOCRACY. And, as e.b. white puts it, "Democracy is the recurring suspicion that more than half of the people are right more than half of the time." I personally have no such confidence. If I'm on an island with 20 people, and they're all very intelligent people, then majority rules might be okay, but if I'm with 19 idiots, or even 19 smart people who are voting for what I judge to be a bad decision, I will not put up with it. If a million people believe a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing. And democracy or no, if someone tries to institute such foolery as law, then I will fight with every resource I've got against it.

25. Personal ethics, "community" rules, and codified laws. All exist to promote living within a civilized or safe society. Speeding is illegal, but most people do and have no regret. Society does not brand someone who drives 70 in a 65.

    At one point in US history a majority of people thought alcohol should be illegal so they made it illegal. Social mores (mor-ays) later changed and said "Maybe this ain't so bad" (I'm paraphrasing) SO they changed the law back.

    Each decision needs to be asked two questions in relation to your personal beliefs, the eyes of your community (family, neighborhood, peers, etc), and the rule of law: Is it right? What are the consequences?
    If it's legal, but your friends would disapprove or you'll feel guilty...don't do it. If it's illegal, but won't FEEL guilty, just be prepared for sentencing if you're FOUND guilty. Just like poor 'ol Val Jean

Thread Status:

Not open for further replies.

• TheForce.net
• Jedi Council Forums
• Members
• Rules of the JC
• Staff
• Menu

romerotoodn1977.blogspot.com

Source: https://boards.theforce.net/threads/would-you-steal-a-loaf-of-bread-to-feed-your-starving-family-a-discussion-of-obeying-the-law.9128995/

Share this post