Would You Steal In this situation?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Starwynd
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Starwynd

Guest
A woman was near death from a special kind of cancer. There was one drug that the doctors thought might save her. It was a form of radium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered. The drug was expensive to make, but the druggist was charging ten times what the drug cost him to produce. He paid $200 for the radium and charged $2,000 for a small dose of the drug. The sick woman’s husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money, but he could only get together about $ 1,000, which is half of what it cost. He told the druggist that his wife was dying and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist said, “No, I discovered the drug and I’m going to make money from it.” So Heinz got desperate and broke into the man’s store to steal the drug for his wife.

So I have two questions for you:

Should Heinz have broken into the laboratory to steal the drug for his wife? Why or why not?

What does the Church teach in this kind of situation?
 
I can’t answer your questions,
but I can tell you what I heard recently of Mother Theresa doing in such a case, when she needed medicines for a dying person.
When the pharmacist refused to help, she stood in the pharmacy and started to pray the rosary. The pharmacist suddenly broke into tears, asked how she knew his sin, and gave her a large bag of medicines. (That morning he had thrown his own mother out into the street, saying he couldnt take care of her any more.)

I hope I would have the faith to do the same in such a case,

Of course if you are referring to the current shameful medical system in the US, which denies insurance coverage and meds to millions of people, I think we need to insist on a change that addresses everyone’s needs in a fair way, instead of lining the pockets of pharmacy and insurance company CEOs.
 
No, I would not. Prayer is the answer on this one. Desperation leads many people away from the right reasons and people feel that the end justifies the means. However, as Mother Teresa responded, hearts can be changed with prayer.
 
If necessary means are at stake, such as food, there are a few instances in which the Church would condone “stealing”. While the prinicple of private property has been affirmed by the Church again and again, at the same time, the Church recognizes that no has an absolute right it almost anything according the principle of the universal destination of goods.

For instance, everyone has a right to life, but if you are shooting people down in cold blood, someone else would have the “right” to kill you in so far as it was necessary to stop you.

In the same way, withholding food or ordinary and necessary means of survival from those who would die without it when you have plenty is not strictly speaking, moral. Your right to private property does not extend to hording thingslike food when others are starving.

In the case you presented, I think that the fact that cancer drugs are not considered ordinary means of sustaining the person’s life. While you have a right to ordinary means like food and water, you don’t strictly speaking have a right to extraordinary means that you cannot pay for. I wouldn’t think stealing could be considered moral in this case.
 
If it were for my child, I would steal it and worry about the consequences later.

I’m not saying it’s right… I’m just saying it’s what I would do. :o
And it is my personal opinion that God would judge the pharmacist much more severely than me. His motivation would have been greed - mine would have been for the love of my child.
 
yellowbird said:
If it were for my child, I would steal it and worry about the consequences later.

I’m not saying it’s right… I’m just saying it’s what I would do. :o
And it is my personal opinion that God would judge the pharmacist much more severely than me. His motivation would have been greed - mine would have been for the love of my child.
Click to expand...
I understand the sentiment, and agree that you would be judged less severely, but there is also something deeply wrong with the attitude of It might be a sin, but I would do it anyway.
 
I would be torn but… Stealing is stealing. The ends do not justify the means.:nope:

Nothing good can from from sin. Just not possible.

Paul
 
Paul2274 said:
I would be torn but… Stealing is stealing. The ends do not justify the means.:nope:

Nothing good can from from sin. Just not possible.

Paul
Click to expand...
Plenty of good comes from sin. It just cannot justify the sin.

I steal money to feed my dog. Good thing to feed a dog, but it doesn’t justify my act.

I kill a man in cold blood to help his girlfriend out of a verbally abusive relationship. It’s a good thing she’s out of the relationship. Doesn’t justify the murder.
 
Starwynd said:
A woman was near death from a special kind of cancer. There was one drug that the doctors thought might save her. It was a form of radium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered. The drug was expensive to make, but the druggist was charging ten times what the drug cost him to produce. He paid $200 for the radium and charged $2,000 for a small dose of the drug. The sick woman’s husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money, but he could only get together about $ 1,000, which is half of what it cost. He told the druggist that his wife was dying and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist said, “No, I discovered the drug and I’m going to make money from it.” So Heinz got desperate and broke into the man’s store to steal the drug for his wife.

So I have two questions for you:

Should Heinz have broken into the laboratory to steal the drug for his wife? Why or why not?

What does the Church teach in this kind of situation?
Click to expand...
Answer #1:

No, Heinz should not have broken into the laboratory to steal the drug for his wife. Obviously it’s breaking the law, and if he got caught he’d be charged with breaking and entering as well as grand theft, and so on. I can understand that to him it’s worth taking the risk, but suppose he gets caught or the devil makes it so he gets caught? Then what? His wife might die and he’ll be in jail or prison.

Heinz should instead pray and ask others to pray and pray to God that he removes the obstacles, opens the doors, and touches of the hearts of the people involved in this. God might help him in this case.

Supposing he decides to steal it anyway AND he gets away with it, he’s not only breaking an entering and stealing, but he’s also lying to his wife most likely as to how he got the drug with the little money they had. While she won’t be held accountable for using the drugs under the pretext of the lie, he will be.

Hopefully Heinz would do the right thing and pray and try to raise more funds. If his wife suffers ever more, they should both give that pain up to the Lord and He will bless them for it. If his wife is near death anyways, it’s entirely possible the drug won’t work as expected anyways. There could be a side effect or something and it kills her or makes her worse.

I think it’s best to pray to God to move the heart of the scientist/doctor who made the drug and God will do that if it is His will, or He will provide another way, or, perhaps due to their devotion and faith, cure his wife with a miracle.

In the end, if the scientist does not give them the drug for a reduced cost, then he has failed to perform an act of charity, love, and mercy for this couple, and I believe God will gold Mr. Scientist accountable for his greed in this matter later. It will balance out one way or the other.

So no, Heinz should not have broken into the store. He should have prayed and waited even more for God to answer him.

Answer #2:

I’m honestly not educated enough on the Church’s stance on this issue to speak with any authority.
 
If I were Heinz, I would obtain the drugs through nook or crook, but find a way to pay the greedy druggist a reasonable sum. I would enclose a written prayer for the druggist with my anonymous cash payment, and appeal to the higher angels of his nature by also expressing sincere gratitude to him - for his discovery. I believe he would understand, and in his heart and soul, claim this good and decent restitution as a grace from God.

That is my imperfect, but practical solution. Sort of rendering to Caesar and God.
 
mh2007 said:
If I were Heinz, I would obtain the drugs through nook or crook, but find a way to pay the greedy druggist a reasonable sum. I would enclose a written prayer for the druggist with my anonymous cash payment, and appeal to the higher angels of his nature by also expressing sincere gratitude to him - for his discovery. I believe he would understand, and in his heart and soul, claim this good and decent restitution as a grace from God.

That is my imperfect, but practical solution. Sort of rendering to Caesar and God.
Click to expand...
How is a “reasonable” sum determined?
 
Starwynd said:
A woman was near death from a special kind of cancer. There was one drug that the doctors thought might save her. It was a form of radium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered. The drug was expensive to make, but the druggist was charging ten times what the drug cost him to produce. He paid $200 for the radium and charged $2,000 for a small dose of the drug. The sick woman’s husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money, but he could only get together about $ 1,000, which is half of what it cost. He told the druggist that his wife was dying and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist said, “No, I discovered the drug and I’m going to make money from it.” So Heinz got desperate and broke into the man’s store to steal the drug for his wife.

So I have two questions for you:

Should Heinz have broken into the laboratory to steal the drug for his wife? Why or why not?

What does the Church teach in this kind of situation?
Click to expand...
According to St. Thomas Aquinas, in such cases (he’s talking about food, but your example would also cover it) the act isn’t stealing at all. Private property is a convenient and appropriate way of organizing society, but it’s not an absolute right. Taking something that legally belongs to someone else is not intrinsically evil. It is usually evil, but not in extreme cases where you need it to save life and the other person doesn’t (in other words, obviously taking the medicine from another dying person would be wrong).

Edwin
 
Paul2274 said:
I would be torn but… Stealing is stealing. The ends do not justify the means.:nope:
Click to expand...
Not intrinsically evil means. But this isn’t an intrinsically evil act. Food and medicine belong rightly to those who desperately need them. That is the teaching of St. Thomas.

Edwin
 
Contarini said:
Not intrinsically evil means. But this isn’t an intrinsically evil act. Food and medicine belong rightly to those who desperately need them. That is the teaching of St. Thomas.

Edwin
Click to expand...
This is interesting, and I don’t doubt you, but would you mind referencing - I’d like to study closer.
 
Awful_Things said:
This is interesting, and I don’t doubt you, but would you mind referencing - I’d like to study closer.
Click to expand...
Sorry for not providing this originally. It’s from Summa Theologiae II/II, Question 66, Article 7. Here’s how he ends the body of his response:
Nevertheless, if the need be so manifest and urgent, that it is evident that the present need must be remedied by whatever means be at hand (for instance when a person is in some imminent danger, and there is no other possible remedy), then it is lawful for a man to succor his own need by means of another’sproperty, by taking it either openly or secretly: nor is this properly speaking theft or robbery.
Click to expand...
That seems to cover this example pretty well.

Edwin
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top