Robin the Hood

What's your opinion on "Robin the Hood"?

Is it or was it okay to rob the rich to feed the poor?

ahhhh situational ethics.....a minefield of controversy. Was it right to steal from the rich, the money that had been stolen from the poor in the first place and then give it back to the poor? I guess in the big picture, how did this change the powers in charge to relieve the poor of the unfair tribute they had to pay?

I'll wait and let KT reply, he just got done reading Henty's book on Robin Hood..........

Who is KT?

Stealing is wrong regardless of situational ethics.

However, the peasants had the choice to either leave or revolt to end the unfair taxes levied against them. Either one of those would negate the need to pay those taxes, as would being killed.

Jig wrote:

Stealing is wrong regardless of situational ethics.

However, the peasants had the choice to either leave or revolt to end the unfair taxes levied against them. Either one of those would negate the need to pay those taxes, as would being killed.

KT was King Tiddle who now is Relyt.....

Now leaving wasn't an option to most of them since the neighboring Dukes (or whomever) had the same policy. What's the diff. between a revolt (which was against the law) and stealing back the money that was stolen from them? It's not like the Dukes FAIRLY exacted that tribute.

I am not in favor of theivery, however since Amanda is off running errands today I thought that I would do her part..... as in looking at a given situation from all sides........

Jig wrote:

Stealing is wrong regardless of situational ethics.

Is it? Say someone takes something of yours, such as a tool. Now, when you try to get it back, they claim you are "stealing" it. So....is it wrong for you to take it back?

Robin the Hood.. was it wrong i would say no. At that time england was having severe problems. King Richard was missing in action. So all the dukes and barons and anyone who thought they were somebody were taxing everything they could from the people. Robin saw this and thiought that the only way he could get back at them is drain them of their own money and give it back to the poor.

Is it wrong ro rebel? I see stealing on the ten commandments but I don't see rebelling anywhere.

Trying to look at this from a biblical prespective.

And since we've tackled the translation thing now and we know that it says "do not murder," I would have had to add the corrupt and very nasty baron/governor/sheriff to my short list of people who needed killin.


My question is, after he is "you-fa-nized" is it still stealing to take the money? He most obviously doesn't need it anymore....