The universal reaction to looting* is the same. Outrage.
I am glad about that. Not about the looting -- but about the moral outrage being felt and expressed by those watching the looting from the outside.
It is an encouraging thing to know that most people still have a moral conscience. Imagine how disturbing it would be if the general reaction to the looting was indifference.
Pastor Mark Roberts has an excellent essay on the looting.
The money paragraph :
"Perhaps one of the reasons I'm so bugged by scenes of looting is that, at some level, I relate to the looters. They force me to confront things in human nature – indeed, in my own nature – that I'd rather deny. I can't imagine that I'd ever steal from a Wal-Mart, if, heaven forbid, the city of Irvine was devastated by some natural disaster, like an earthquake. But the greed and selfishness of my heart gets expressed in lots of other ways, ways that are much more subtle. Perhaps they're even more virulent because they're more easily rationalized away."
You know what? Though I would like to hope not, you and I might be looting alongside with the rest of them if we were in New Orleans right now. On the inside, we are driven by the same disease of the soul that causes looting: selfishness and greed. Is there any among us who do not struggle with addictions to those two core sins?
The take away from this particular aspect of the Katrina disaster is this. We are in a broken and fallen world. All of us, from the destitute in New Orleans to the wealthy elsewhere -- all of us are stained by sin.
The solution is the same for all of us -- it is not more police or national guardsmen. The solution is a new heart. The answer is Christ. The only true hope that any of us have is to be made new.
* The looting of TV's, jewelry stores, gun shops, private residences, nursing homes etc. Like many, I am not outraged about the looting of bottled water and bread.
I was unsettled when my jumior high boys were talking about the looting as if it were cool...but it opened a door for me to speak about good citizenship and being a person of strong character...Even discussed the contrast between "church" groups who go to help and the people who are just out to see what they can get for free.
Posted by: maryellen | September 02, 2005 at 13:50
The reaction to looting has not been universal outrage. There was a story on the news yesterday about the crowds amassed at the convention center, saying that there was a great deal of tolerance for the looters among that crowd, because the looters were sharing; specifically, they were sharing food and drink they had looted.
Which raises a more difficult moral question: if your options are break into that Walgreens across the street and grab some bread, or starve to death, is breaking into the Walgreens really such a morally repugnant option?
I'm certainly not going to defend people stealing TVs and designer clothes, but with the city in its current state, I can't fully condemn people going after the bare necessities by such means. Particularly if doing so saves lives without taking any.
Posted by: tgirsch | September 02, 2005 at 15:52
Maryellen,
Way to use teachable moment to talk about wisdom!
Tom,
Here is an interesting proverb to chew on:
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Proverbs%206:30-31;&version=31;
I would be interested in your thoughts.
I have heard reports of policeman who said they would not do a thing about looting of groceries ... but they would stop looting of anything else.
If I am not mistaken, there is a big discussion taking place on EO about the morality of stealing given those squalid conditions.
Do you know of anyone who is not outraged at the looting of jewelry stores or hospitals or other people's homes?
Posted by: Dawn Treader | September 02, 2005 at 16:43
I have been pondering why many of these people have behaved like animals. The "they were stealing to survive" meme does not hold up to scrutiny. Of course, no one blames people for trying to survive the best way they can. This hardly explains why women are getting raped, teenagers their throats slit, rescue helicopters shot at, or policemen shot in the head, does it?
We need to examine the consequences of taking God, and moral absolutes out of society - and teaching people that they are only a higher form of animal. For goodness sakes, look at this quote:
Darwin wasn't just provocative in saying that we descend from the apes—he didn't go far enough. We are apes in every way, from our long arms and tailless bodies to our habits and temperament.-- Frans de Waal, primate scientist at Emory University.
Ideas have consequences. Teach people they are animals and they will behave like animals. Using the Darwin model, pure domination of the strong over the weak is not only inevitable, it is preferable. The Christian model for society is somewhat more positive.
Posted by: Jeff Blogworthy | September 03, 2005 at 12:09
Mr. Dawn Treader:
The proverb is only meaningful insofar as one makes no distinction between Biblical morality and morality-at-large. I know that you do not, but many (probably most) make just such a distinction.
And it should be noted that I'm certainly not making excuses for the looting of non-essentail goods, or of rape, or of any of the other nasty things that have been going on there. I was simply pointing out that it's not so cut-and-dry as you had initially painted it.
What's obvious, and what goes without saying, is that events like these tend to bring out both the best and the worst of humanity.
Posted by: tgirsch | September 06, 2005 at 14:09
Jeff Blogworthy:
I'd be willing to bet that most of those left behind (including the ones behaving badly) consider themselves devout Christians, and are more inclined to believe in Creationism than Darwinism. So your "teaching people they are animals" allegation rings hollow.
Posted by: tgirsch | September 06, 2005 at 14:20