The Tendency to Turn All Sorts of Things into Ethical Matters

[Soloist]

Terrorists got brought up... So a question could easily be is there a difference between giving ransom to them versus gangs?

What about the homeless who will buy drugs?

Other than the legality, I don't see much difference between paying ransom to a terrorist or gang or say a lone wolf American criminal hostage taker.

I don't know why I need to be more concerned with the homeless man who uses my money to buy drugs, any more (or less) than I need to be concerned about an employee or supplier, who uses the bulk of his paycheck/profits on drugs/gambling/prostitutes or whatever. The money being properly earned vs. freely given, shouldn't change my culpability. If it does, exactly why and/or how?

Does it make a difference in your eyes if the terror act planned is pre-known? For example legality aside, ISIS takes some people hostage and demands a hefty ransom. They plan on buying a sample of small pox from a break off group in Russia and then releasing it in the US. Or even deploying a dirty bomb. Does it make any difference knowing the money to save a few people will be used to kill many many more? Do you see yourself as taking any culpability? Clearly we are to pay taxes, this is a little different then speaking of say the US government dropping a bomb on Japan.

[Josh]

I like your thoughts, RZehr.

Josh, I would like your response to this some time.

In that case, am I understanding you to say that the amount we give to others' demands in a particular situation is on a spectrum?
At one end of the spectrum it may be ethical. At the other end it is unethical?
And at some place in the middle of the scale it gets really gray? And it would take wisdom or Spirit guidance to know what to do?
Or is the point on the scale very black and white from your vantage point?

I did respond to it.

[Josh]

If CAM thinks they should give $17 million away to people in Haiti…

… they should have been willing to do so for Jeriah Mast’s victims.

Yet they wasn’t done. I see a real problem when someone thinks it’s moral and ethical to give $17 million to criminal gangsters, but somehow not moral or unethical to give that to Jeriah Mast’s victims.

[RZehr]

Terrorists got brought up... So a question could easily be is there a difference between giving ransom to them versus gangs?

What about the homeless who will buy drugs?

Other than the legality, I don't see much difference between paying ransom to a terrorist or gang or say a lone wolf American criminal hostage taker.

I don't know why I need to be more concerned with the homeless man who uses my money to buy drugs, any more (or less) than I need to be concerned about an employee or supplier, who uses the bulk of his paycheck/profits on drugs/gambling/prostitutes or whatever. The money being properly earned vs. freely given, shouldn't change my culpability. If it does, exactly why and/or how?

Does it make a difference in your eyes if the terror act planned is pre-known? For example legality aside, ISIS takes some people hostage and demands a hefty ransom. They plan on buying a sample of small pox from a break off group in Russia and then releasing it in the US. Or even deploying a dirty bomb. Does it make any difference knowing the money to save a few people will be used to kill many many more? Do you see yourself as taking any culpability? Clearly we are to pay taxes, this is a little different then speaking of say the US government dropping a bomb on Japan.

I wouldn’t promote our church to lift offerings, or for CAM to raise money to freely give ISIS money in order to help ISIS further their mission. It isn’t a worthy mission they have.
If I lived in Afghanistan and ISIS was taking a cut of the market’s revenue, I’d still buy products I need at the market. I’d also buy ransomed people back from ISIS. Doing so does not “cause” them to use that ransom money for evil. They have free will, and they are freely choosing to do evil with the money they’ve extorted. That is their responsibility.

This is the way it looks to me.


Do you think that I have more residual responsibility on money I give freely, than I have on the money I use as payment?

[Soloist]

I wouldn’t promote our church to lift offerings, or for CAM to raise money to freely give ISIS money in order to help ISIS further their mission. It isn’t a worthy mission they have.
If I lived in Afghanistan and ISIS was taking a cut of the market’s revenue, I’d still buy products I need at the market. I’d also buy ransomed people back from ISIS. Doing so does not “cause” them to use that ransom money for evil. They have free will, and they are freely choosing to do evil with the money they’ve extorted. That is their responsibility.

This is the way it looks to me.


Do you think that I have more residual responsibility on money I give freely, than I have on the money I use as payment?

I think the bottom question is the primary point of contention. I honestly don't know. I'm extremely uncomfortable with giving 17 million to evil men but I have struggled with the druggie too in my role in giving them money.

[RZehr]

I wouldn’t promote our church to lift offerings, or for CAM to raise money to freely give ISIS money in order to help ISIS further their mission. It isn’t a worthy mission they have.
If I lived in Afghanistan and ISIS was taking a cut of the market’s revenue, I’d still buy products I need at the market. I’d also buy ransomed people back from ISIS. Doing so does not “cause” them to use that ransom money for evil. They have free will, and they are freely choosing to do evil with the money they’ve extorted. That is their responsibility.

This is the way it looks to me.


Do you think that I have more residual responsibility on money I give freely, than I have on the money I use as payment?

I think the bottom question is the primary point of contention. I honestly don't know. I'm extremely uncomfortable with giving 17 million to evil men but I have struggled with the druggie too in my role in giving them money.

I think I may see the same differences in you (and Josh) and myself, on the abortion/vaccine question as well. I feel less responsible for what happens outside my direct control. I think where you two are coming out on the ransom question is a little similar to your calculation on the vaccine/abortion question. At least that is what it looks like to me. Consistent.

[Ernie]

If CAM thinks they should give $17 million away to people in Haiti…

… they should have been willing to do so for Jeriah Mast’s victims.

Yet they wasn’t done. I see a real problem when someone thinks it’s moral and ethical to give $17 million to criminal gangsters, but somehow not moral or unethical to give that to Jeriah Mast’s victims.

CAM does not believe they should pay any ransom money to kidnappers.
They did give hundreds of thousands to Jeriah Mast's victims.

[Josh]

If CAM thinks they should give $17 million away to people in Haiti…

… they should have been willing to do so for Jeriah Mast’s victims.

Yet they wasn’t done. I see a real problem when someone thinks it’s moral and ethical to give $17 million to criminal gangsters, but somehow not moral or unethical to give that to Jeriah Mast’s victims.

CAM does not believe they should pay any ransom money to kidnappers.
They did give hundreds of thousands to Jeriah Mast's victims.

I agree with CAM in these cases.

I disagree with the people calling to donate millions of dollars to kidnappers. The people calling for they certainly weren’t leaping to help JM’s victims.

[Ernie]

Generally speaking, I don't believe people are morally responsible for second and third order effects.

There is nothing intrinstically immoral about sharing information that someone is going around committing violent crime.

Let's say, for example, that I know that so-and-so is a rapist. It is not immoral for me to decide to tell a third party about this. A rapist has no expectation of some right to privacy against me.

It is not immoral for me to tell someone who may be capable of using violence against that rapist.

I do not have a moral duty to see to it that violence and coercion is not used against other violent people, such as rapists.

There is no moral responsibility to not report crimes to the police. And I have a hard time understanding how anyone can think that is a consistent position. It is entirely up to the police officer what he decides to do with my report. And it is entirely his moral responsibility if he decides to engage in a violent act.

So Josh... This is the kind of reasoning I have about using vaccines that use fetal cell lines or are tested on fetal tissue. I'm curious why you feel strongly on the one and not the other? This is not a gotcha question... I really am interested in knowing your thought processes...

If there are vaccines that are not associated with aborted fetuses, I prefer those because it avoids implication by association, but I don't see it as a moral issue.

[RZehr]

Generally speaking, I don't believe people are morally responsible for second and third order effects.

There is nothing intrinstically immoral about sharing information that someone is going around committing violent crime.

Let's say, for example, that I know that so-and-so is a rapist. It is not immoral for me to decide to tell a third party about this. A rapist has no expectation of some right to privacy against me.

It is not immoral for me to tell someone who may be capable of using violence against that rapist.

I do not have a moral duty to see to it that violence and coercion is not used against other violent people, such as rapists.

There is no moral responsibility to not report crimes to the police. And I have a hard time understanding how anyone can think that is a consistent position. It is entirely up to the police officer what he decides to do with my report. And it is entirely his moral responsibility if he decides to engage in a violent act.

So Josh... This is the kind of reasoning I have about using vaccines that use fetal cell lines or are tested on fetal tissue. I'm curious why you feel strongly on the one and not the other? This is not a gotcha question... I really am interested in knowing your thought processes...

If there are vaccines that are not associated with aborted fetuses, I prefer those because it avoids implication by association, but I don't see it as a moral issue.

Same here. When I read Josh’s post, the vaccine matter came to my mind as well.