Shoplifting? Moral objection, or just scared of being nicked?

josh91 said:
Tescos is a massive corporation who can cope with you taking stuff. Hell they even market stuff so aggressively that they themselves lose money on some products just to get people in the store.
I have lots of respect for the developers of this software, whereas I have no respect for Tesco, they're not a good company, just the wal-mart of the UK.
Click to expand...

So activision, Microsoft and <insert current X factor record label here> are small companies?

But I still don't see how you equate size with acceptability of ripping them off.


You could empty one of their stores and to you and me it's be like losing 50p, you know it.
Click to expand...

Actually it would be like stealing several hundred thousand pounds of stock and get far more people fired/put out of work than burning down the local corner shop.
 
Rainmaker said:
Since religion is retarded and there is no need to account to oneself for religious, spiritual or "supernatural" reasons, why are you against stealing? Surely given the fact that you only have one life, no accountability to a higher power etc, then you should be clawing away every advantage you can give yourself to better your own life regardless of others?

Or is it just the fact you'd be too scared of such a society meaning others could then likewise steal from you (because you're not strong enough to stop them) that forms the basis of your decision that stealing is 'wrong'? Surely 'morals' and one life/survival of the fittest are almost contrary ideas?

Genuine question. :)
Click to expand...

Wait are you saying the only reason you don't mug the old lady down the road is because you think god will punish you for it? :confused:
 
Tefal said:
Wait are you saying the only reason you don't mug the old lady down the road is because you think god will punish you for it? :confused:
Click to expand...

No, it's because (1) I do have religious spiritual beliefs and (2) I have essentially entered into a reciprocal agreement with society that I don't wish to be stolen from, that I recognise that loss of resources to another through force is hurtful and 'immoral' and that as such I won't do it to you if you don't do it to me. Further, even if you did do it to me, I wouldn't "stoop to your level" and cause further harm in the vein of 'I'm alright Jack' or 'You did so I will'.

Platinum87 denies all of the above, so I was just wondering why stealing is 'wrong in essence' given those facts. There's a difference. :)
 
Rainmaker said:
So provide the logic, as I'm not sure where you're coming from. You say that religion is retarded, you have one life, and that if you weren't so lazy you'd be clawing every advantage for yourself to make your single, unaccountable life better... yet stealing is 'wrong in essence'. Since you have no higher power to account to, there is no karma etc, and you can only stand on your own two feet; what makes taking whatever you want/need inherently wrong, if it isn't the fact that mutual agreement in 'society' means you don't then get stolen from yourself?

I don't see how such a society or personal attitude 'does not compute' when you're coming from the viewpoint of "one life, no God, no accountability - you get one crack at it, and you have no consequences". Surely better then, to take everything you fancy and make yourself as comfortable as possible? It's not like you're going to be judged after death for it...

So if it isn't for spiritual reasons, and it isn't because you've entered into a reciprocal agreement to prevent theft from yourself, what exactly is it that forms your logical conclusion?
Click to expand...

Obviously i fail to properly express my opinions... :(

Rainmaker said:
No, it's because (1) I do have religious spiritual beliefs and (2) I have essentially entered into a reciprocal agreement with society that I don't wish to be stolen from, that I recognise that loss of resources to another through force is hurtful and 'immoral' and that as such I won't do it to you if you don't do it to me. Further, even if you did do it to me, I wouldn't "stoop to your level" and cause further harm in the vein of 'I'm alright Jack' or 'You did so I will'.

Platinum87 denies all of the above, so I was just wondering why stealing is 'wrong in essence' given those facts. There's a difference. :)
Click to expand...

Well no i agree with you, except i decide that i will not abide by "i wont do it to you if you dont do it to me"..

Essentially me and you aswell as everyone else enter into this unspoken agreement.. however i decide to go against it, however i still agree that it is wrong.

Get it now?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom