2007-11-24 06:44:04 · 55 answers · asked by SHARKY Xl 5 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Polls & Surveys
Okay, I'll treat this incident as if it really happened ... duh!
The pauper chose not to steal it so why did you? You could have invited the rich man to give it to him, you could have bought him one yourself or given him the money. Anyway, the fact that a person is rich does not entitle others to steal from him. Does it then follow that it would be okay for someone to burgle his house just because he is rich?
2007-11-25 09:57:12 · answer #1 · answered by Dolores & the prune 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
(Part 1) I believe this is called "Robin Hood Syndrome". The problem comes when the decisions about relative need become complicated. Generally, the Seventh Commandment (in the Roman Catholic or Lutheran numbering) is the best guide.
(Part 2) It is wrong and illegal to steal in the straightforward way. This precludes stealing from the Rich to give to the Poor. It actually works more efficiently the other way around. Society is so arranged that the rich accumulate wealth by removing it from the poor: the "consumers" and the "taxpayers". This is accomplished by manipulating society and the law, much easier for the Rich than it is for the Poor to do. This is the nature and the result of wealth, power, and ambition.
2007-11-24 06:54:36 · answer #2 · answered by Tony 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
u did? Hehehehehheee no, the sandwich was probably under 5 dollars and rich has a lot of money so he wont need it...unlike the pauper. And JUST HOW did u get inside a rich persons house to steal a sandwich?
2007-11-24 06:47:15 · answer #3 · answered by ♥ßεαμŧįғμι mє♥ 2 · 0⤊ 3⤋
Stealing is stealing,,,. If the pauper had stolen it..that's another story..why didn't you wake the rich man up and ask for it for the pauper...he may have bought him a nice hot dinner when he saw how thoughtful you were being..
2007-11-24 10:01:29 · answer #4 · answered by Boopsie 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Well see the problem is the sandwhich had bread made with peanut oil which the pauper is allergic to. He's severely allergic, causing anaphylactic shock and seeing as he's a pauper, no one was around to call 911, so you just killed the guy/gal. Good job. Nice. No good deed goes unpunished.
2007-11-24 06:52:51 · answer #5 · answered by kurtisgod2 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Hmmm . . . not leaving anything out, are you?
Yes -- always wrong to take what is not freely given, but there is no doubt that wealth is often distributed unfairly.
I'd say if you're intentions were good -- you meant no harm to anyone -- then it's not a big deal. You already know stealing is wrong and so you need to find a better way to help people.
Two lashes with a wet noodle!
2007-11-24 06:53:38 · answer #6 · answered by DK 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Bad form.
You should have went and bought the pauper a sandwich.
There is no way even though your intentions were honorable stealing is still stealing.
Don
2007-11-24 06:47:38 · answer #7 · answered by Don M 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
ummm...
you would probably have to know the character of the rich person. if they became rich by starting a charity for helpless kids in Africa, then that's kinda messed up because they already gave their life to help those in need.
however, if the rich person was a total jerk and could care less about anyone else, sure, take their sandwich.
2007-11-24 06:48:22 · answer #8 · answered by Julia V 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Yes...
Those rich people have horrid sandwich fillings...
The paupers don't deserve anything that bad.
2007-11-24 07:01:27 · answer #9 · answered by Badgerer 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
If this was a true story then I would have to answer that stealing no matter who benifits is against the law
The person you stole from is being denied his property
2007-11-24 06:48:28 · answer #10 · answered by J Rebel 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋