You are at the supermarket. They have packets of fresh chicken pieces at half price. They also have a notice saying: THREE PACKETS PER FAMILY
FIRST SITUATION: You are with your spouse, and grown up child. You decide to take three packets each and pay for them at separate check-outs.
IS THIS STEALING? IS IT A SIN?
Remember, you have paid for all nine packets; so is it stealing?
SECOND SITUATION: The reason you bought so much chicken is because you need them to feed the homeless at the local shelter for the homeless. It is a charity with not much funds.
IS BUYING NINE PACKETS STEALING OR NOT IN THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES?
THIRD SITUATION: Here's another scenario. You buy the nine packets and keep three for yourself as a family, and the other six packets are for two other families you know; for example two friends with their own families.
IS THIS STEALING OR NOT?
...NOPE!
ReplyDeleteOne vote for "Not a sin".
DeleteGod bless, Tom.
To the first, maybe not a sin -- but a loud "Not Fair!" We're not privy to a store's behind-the-scenes inventory, but if a product's in demand I like to leave one behind. Silly.
ReplyDeleteTo #'s 2 and 3? No ... but why would I feel obligated to say something to the cashier? Again, silly me.
It always annoys me when supermarkets put restrictions on their sales. It's like saying, "Potatoes at £x a kilo but only if you fry them; if boiled or baked the price is higher!"
DeleteIn this case they have a number of packets they want to sell at half price. Surely it should be first come first served and when it's gone it's gone.
I tend to agree with your sentiments, Mevely. It's right to leave some for other people.
On one occasion the cashier gave me too much change. About 50 pence (half a £) too much. I noticed when I was out in the car. So I got back and returned the 50 pence. She looked at me as if I was an idiot. "Not many people would do that!" she said.
Being a Christian can be difficult.
God bless, Mevely.
We will often shop when Danny notes a sale at a local supermarket and yes, sometimes when we get there, the sale item has already sold out. Is that because someone bought more than he or she should have? I don't know, but I know that I like to stick to the rules and not cheat the opportunities of others.
ReplyDeleteAnd Victor, you are so right - it isn't easy to be a Christian in today's world, but that's our highest calling. Blessings!
Hi Martha,
DeleteCoincidentally, I was speaking to Father Francis on the phone a few minutes ago. He said that strictly speaking it is not stealing because the items have been paid for. However, you should abide by the supermarket's rules because by taking more than your fair share you have denied someone else buying the chickens at half price.
So when you and Danny don't find items on a sale it's because someone else bought more than they should have.
I did return the 50 pence I was given and the cashier thought I was silly.
God bless, Martha. We Christians are an odd species.
Not stealing and I would abide by the sign.
ReplyDelete“ Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit, but in humility consider others better than yourselves. Each of you should look not only to your own interests, but also to the interests of others. but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness.” Philippians 2;3-7
Nice to see you here again, Debby.
DeleteYes, it is not strictly speaking stealing. However, it could be said that by taking more than our fair share we are denying someone else their share.
God bless.
thecontemplativecat here. all reasons are noble, but fair? That is hard question. #2 is more likely, #3 is a way to help those in need. Fair? That would be a judgment call. Good prompts.
ReplyDeleteHi Susan,
DeleteIf the cause is noble; i.e. you need the nine packets to feed the homeless, (I know someone who does that every week), then is it OK to buy more than the allotted three packets per family? What if by doing so you are denying someone else the chance to buy cheap packets - say a poor family or pensioner who will attend the shop and find no more stock?
What a (Christian) dilemma!
God bless, Susan.
1
ReplyDeleteYes because your intention is to keep all packets. You have paid at different checkouts in order to cheat the system, so the motive is dishonest.
2
No because the recipients are not from the same family. The intention is to share with others who cannot buy them themselves.
3
Same as situation 2.
Thank you Anonymous. I agree with your No. 1 response. The intention is to cheat the system - the sin of greed?
ReplyDeleteIf it was cake or biscuits I'd probably risk the sin of greed and buy nine packets and confess later.
Situation 2 is to feed the homeless. I wonder if you asked the store manager whether he would allow you to take more than three packets.
I'm not so sure about situation 3 ... but if it was biscuits ???
God bless.
My interpretation of the word 'stealing' is taking something that is not yours or have not paid for it.
ReplyDeleteTherefore, none of the three scenarios shown is stealing.
Enjoy the chicken. I like chicken, why didn't you invite me to eat it.
C M
Yes, you make a good point CM. Strictly speaking it is not stealing. Supermarkets often have such offers limiting the number a customer can purchase.
DeleteGod bless.
I don’t think so.
ReplyDeletewww.rsrue.blogspot.com
Thank you, Regine. God bless.
DeleteIt's not stealing, since you are paying for it.
ReplyDeleteI once asked a grocery manager about this. He said they really don't mind how many times you come back and buy the special, or how many of your family members do it. The limit is to keep one person from buying it all up at once, or to keep another store from buying it all out and then reselling it in their own store at a higher price.
You make good points, Mimi. Yes, I have seen trolleys full of just one item - for example bread, or drinks like cola etc .. and often wondered whether these are people buying for a restaurant. No one would need that many loaves as a family. Or, as you say, they buy to sell in their own smaller corner shop.
DeleteGod bless.