Cracker Barrel Fires 73-Year-Old Veteran Who Gave Food To 'Needy' Man

[Zaac]

There's also a matter of liability. By giving the homeless guy the muffin without paying for it, the 73-year old made Cracker Barrel responsible for any illness or injury the homeless guy may have incurred by eating the muffin. In fact, these policies that some are blaming on Cracker Barrel (and other corporations) may actually be dictated by their insurance companies ... the same insurance companies that those same people have placed their trust in for our healthcare systems.

And this again is perhaps the exact line of thinking the 73 year old was trying to avoid. He just wanted to help someone and everybody else sarts turning it into a liability issue.

Sadly churches now give that same excuse a lot when it comes to why they can't help.

 

[Crabtownboy]

There's also a matter of liability. By giving the homeless guy the muffin without paying for it, the 73-year old made Cracker Barrel responsible for any illness or injury the homeless guy may have incurred by eating the muffin. In fact, these policies that some are blaming on Cracker Barrel (and other corporations) may actually be dictated by their insurance companies ... the same insurance companies that those same people have placed their trust in for our healthcare systems.

The probability of that happening is more remote than finding three needles in six hay stacks.

So fear negates helping others.

I do find many of the responses interesting as they give clear insights into the hearts of many posters here.

 

[church mouse guy]

There's also a matter of liability. By giving the homeless guy the muffin without paying for it, the 73-year old made Cracker Barrel responsible for any illness or injury the homeless guy may have incurred by eating the muffin. In fact, these policies that some are blaming on Cracker Barrel (and other corporations) may actually be dictated by their insurance companies ... the same insurance companies that those same people have placed their trust in for our healthcare systems.

True!

Also, homeless people are bad for business. Downtowns are moving missions out of downtown areas into other parts of town.

The mental hospitals have been closed so there is no medical help there.

The homeless population is dangerous because of alcoholism, drug addiction and mental illness. Also, criminals hide out among the homeless.

If you really care about the homeless, donate to a homeless shelter or a soup kitchen.

 

[Zaac]

The probability of that happening is more remote than finding three needles in six hay stacks.

So fear negates helping others.

I do find many of the responses interesting as they give clear insights into the hearts of many posters here.

I'm not even sure it's so much fear as it is "I'm not gonna help because it might cost me something".

And I believe you are absolutely correct with your insight.

 

[Rolfe]

I do find many of the responses interesting as they give clear insights into the hearts of many posters here.

Like the belief that one ought to keep the Eighth Commandment?

 

[Rolfe]

I'm not even sure it's so much fear as it is "I'm not gonna help because it might cost me something".

And I believe you are absolutely correct with your insight.

I doubt that you will find many commenting in this thread who will cast blame on the man in the OP for his motive, if he was trying to help someone in need. The blame seems focused on him for giving away what was not his...which is theft, and is morally and legally wrong.

Or do you and CTB think that it is okay to "rob the rich to give to the poor"?

I think that your motives are right, but that they are tempered by the approval of an immoral method.

 

[Crabtownboy]

I doubt that you will find many commenting in this thread who will cast blame on the man in the OP for his motive, if he was trying to help someone in need. The blame seems focused on him for giving away what was not his...which is theft, and is morally and legally wrong.

Or do you and CTB think that it is okay to "rob the rich to give to the poor"?

A biscuit or muffin is hardly stealing from the rich. Have you read Les Misérables?

I think that your motives are right, but that they are tempered by the approval of an immoral method.

The immorality, IMHO, is the corporation who would deprive a person of their job simply because they gave away a .05 biscuit that probably would be thrown out in the trash at the end of the day.

I am beginning to really understand the passage in Matthew where the people on the left ask, "When did we see you hungry ................." I have pondered that many times in the past.

 

[Don]

The probability of that happening is more remote than finding three needles in six hay stacks.

So fear negates helping others.

I do find many of the responses interesting as they give clear insights into the hearts of many posters here.

Oh, please. I bring up the harsh reality of the sinful world we live in, and you try to say that's an indication of the hearts of the posters here?

I made no comment whatsoever about whether I thought the vet was correct or not. I do believe that he had been ordered not to do this on several occasions; so he was in violation of Eph 6:5. So you might try to say he was kust trying to be like Jesus; but we have to also reconcile that with the scriptural instructions we've been given.

I once worked for a convenience store chain that had a deli section; we would make sandwiches, and if they hadn't sold 2 or 3 days later, we were required to write them off and throw them in the trash. It was found out that we had been writing them off and giving them to a homeless guy; we were given notice to stop or be fired. So we started putting them in a bag and setting them on the trash dumpster instead. When the homeless guy asked about the sandwiches, we told him we had to bag them and throw them away. I'm pretty sure he found the bag.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

I wonder if it's insulting to call someone ignorant just because they say something you disagree with?

The post was "ignorant" -- there was no calling of the poster names. Try to keep up, please.

 

[Don]

Or do you and CTB think that it is okay to "rob the rich to give to the poor"?

A biscuit or muffin is hardly stealing from the rich. Have you read Les Misérables?





The immorality, IMHO, is the corporation who would deprive a person of their job simply because they gave away a .05 biscuit that probably would be thrown out in the trash at the end of the day.

I am beginning to really understand the passage in Matthew where the people on the left ask, "When did we see you hungry ................." I have pondered that many times in the past.

Would that passage happen to say that they were supposed to use other people's food and belongings?

You have yet to prove that anyone is saying the vet's intent was wrong; but he should have paid for the muffin himself, or asked someone else to, instead of stealing from his employer.

If you agree that even the "smallest sin" makes us unworthy of heaven, then don't you have to agree that even the smallest amount (a .05 cent muffin, for example) is stealing?

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

Or do you and CTB think that it is okay to "rob the rich to give to the poor"?



A biscuit or muffin is hardly stealing from the rich. Have you read Les Misérables?











The immorality, IMHO, is the corporation who would deprive a person of their job simply because they gave away a .05 biscuit that probably would be thrown out in the trash at the end of the day.



I am beginning to really understand the passage in Matthew where the people on the left ask, "When did we see you hungry ................." I have pondered that many times in the past.

Are you truly implying that those who disagree with you would be willing to send the poor away hungry simply because we don't expect a corporation to give away free food?

 

[Bro. Curtis]

There is a simple solution - it is not charity when you give away somebody else's stuff - that's theft.

In 100% agreement, and would like to see Crabtownboy stop ignoring this point.

 

[just-want-peace]

C4K:

Are you truly implying that those who disagree with you would be willing to send the poor away hungry simply because we don't expect a corporation to give away free food?

In 100% agreement, and would like to see Crabtownboy stop ignoring this point.

Afraid this point will always ignored by liberals and those who distort the scriptures for their own benefit. I almost believe the liberal would NOT consider it stealing if you put a gun to a guy's head to take his money, IF you were giving it to another -- after expenses of course.

Come to think of it, that's precisely what the govt does when they use tax income for welfare & scads of other stuff.

For the life of me, I cannot fathom why liberals hate private giving, and/or claim that, per Crabby,

I do find many of the responses interesting as they give clear insights into the hearts of many posters here.

Liberals not only want to take YOUR money to give away, they also judge you on that which they know squat about.

IIRC, there was also some comment in the scriptures that mentioned "false witness"!?!?!?

IOW, to those whose nose stays out of joint by poking it into other peoples business, spend your time volunteering for all your pet causes, and don't concern yourself about what others do that you know zilch about.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

I am beginning to really understand the passage in Matthew where the people on the left ask, "When did we see you hungry ................." I have pondered that many times in the past.

Interesting that you contemplate the passage dealing with the condemned, and not the righteous, who are on the right (see Matthew 25:34).

 

[Rolfe]

Or do you and CTB think that it is okay to "rob the rich to give to the poor"?

A biscuit or muffin is hardly stealing from the rich. Have you read Les Misérables?

Yes it is, and yes.

Do you believe that the morality of the Ten Commandments are dependent upon the situation?

 

[Rolfe]

The immorality, IMHO, is the corporation who would deprive a person of their job simply because they gave away a .05 biscuit that probably would be thrown out in the trash at the end of the day.

[/SIZE]

He could have paid for that 5 cent (or whatever the price) biscuit out of his own pocket, but he chose not to. He stole an object from his employer that was still for sale. He did not pick it out of the trash.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

Valjean was a thief, a guilty thief who was also an escapee. He then did his time. The whole story was not about denying his thievery, but Javert's inability to forgive even though the debt to society was paid.

This doesn't seem like a good illustration in this situation.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

This doesn't seem like a good illustration in this situation.

That's because it isn't. :laugh:

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

The thing is I fully agree with the need of Gods people to support and provide for the poor and think it is something vast segments of the church ignore.

I just don't think CB should be criticised for firing a thief, even if he is 73 and a vet. This was not his first offence as far as I have seen?

 

[Crabtownboy]

Valjean was a thief, a guilty thief who was also an escapee. He then did his time. The whole story was not about denying his thievery, but Javert's inability to forgive even though the debt to society was paid.

This doesn't seem like a good illustration in this situation.

Do you remember how much Valjean was guilty of stealing and for what reason? He was guilty of stealing bread for his sister's hungry children. Kind of a parallel to this. In some literary circles Valjean is seen as the leftist side of politics and Javert the right wing of politics.

Interesting, isn't it.