Your sense of 'coercion' is merely self defense.

Stealing presupposes property

You're basically putting forward a modified Heinz Dilemma

Doesn't justify It.

And saying that it's moral to steal the drug.

If it is this or die, then you are coerced into action.

The only reason scarcity exists in nature is because of original sin, and humanity transgressing the perfect law of God.

So coercion is part of the curse of Genesis.

We are compelled to deal with it by Natural Law.

People, want to assure ownership of things. So they can take Care of it, and be able to organize their belongings appropriatelly, and often, be able to invest their time in It.

When you want to 'repurpose' someone's property because ***you*** think It should be used for something else. You better expect consequences.

The God is being coercive and unjust. If God were moral they would rectify. Failing that, we should rectify it.

God is moral, which is why he cursed us and forces us to toil in order to survive.

GG @Sketchup, you just advanced to level 2!

```For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.```2 Thessalonians 3:10

Or abolish the social construct of property, share resources as needed to make the best possible society. No need to presuppose ownership.

Abolish it...how, If not through coercion.

How do you abolish, a concept?

That comes from human nature?

Forcing someone to experience constant pain and struggle against their will is immoral full stop. God is no exception.

You honestly think that could work? You overestimate humanity

Justice is never immoral.

An example of how you can't abolish concepts, is homosexuality itself.
It exists ever since the ancient greek era, or so archives say. An era that was thousands of years ago.

Ownership is enforced through coercion though. If we must use coercion once to fix the system rather than always use coercion to enforce a bad system I will choose the latter.

Ownership is a social construct, homosexuality is not

It can be, yes

We transgressed God's perfect law by eating from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, which forced us to depart from our perfect creator and experience things like famine, natural disasters, pestilence, and hardship.

Ownership is found even within other species. Like birds that get teritorrial over their nests, or felines.
**Oh look at that! Same narrative is found about homosexuality.**

I don't think the law as outlined in the Bible is perfect. I think this law is unjust.

We shouldn't look towards the animal kingdom for advice on how to live as humans, lest we become like animals ourselves.

Which part? The part about there being consequences for actions?

You don't have the moral authority to make such a determination.

Personal property I'm not against y'know. *Possession* is fine. Systemic ownership of necessities* is not.

Says who? God? Who gave them the moral authority?

"Systemic Ownership of Necessites"
Are you implying- ***a group of people, hoard specific kinds of goods?***

No, lol.

All authority comes from God because he's the beginning and the end.

```“Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.”
```

Well which part of the Bible's laws are you against

Rather than give necessities to those who need them, yes.

You're aware that. Through capitalism, said goods are possible to be bartered for, voluntarily. **When there isn't a government force interfering.**

Aren't Capitalists always seeking profit? They do. By selling goods, to the public.