A resting place between dogma and relative truth (VIII) Unintended consequences

In debate over the validity of ideas and actions, we need to be aware that ideas and actions can of have unintended consequences. They can be either good or bad, but I have a reason this morning to look only at negative examples this morning. There are two aspects to consider. The first is that there will always be those who are willing to take advantage of every situation. I recently heard the true story of a problem the British had with an infestation of snakes years ago,  in India. The decision was made to pay a certain sum of money to anyone who would produce a dead snake. It was a while before it was discovered that the enterprising, had started breeding snakes for that very purpose. As another example people's compassion can be taken advantage of. In my own city, it seems some deliberately dress down to give the appearance of homelessness,  thus playing on people's compassion as they panhandle. CBC television documents that  panhandlers typically make an average of $70 and hour. And that many, after gaining a desired amount, would walk back to their car, and drive home! But  Robert Lupton suggests that even if genuine,  such charity is cheap love. The scripture tells us if someone is hungry feed them, i.e take them to a restaurant or home! I rarely give money!

Secondly there are unintended consequences to ideas that at first may seem to be perfectly good, in both moral, and safety concerns. Legislating morality does not always work. The prohibition, of alcohol in the USA in the 1930s, shows the effect of banning something that most people enjoy.  And while prohibition led to a crackdown on small breweries, it also created a lucrative trade for the criminal gangs who produced bootlegged liquor and sold it. As a safety law example, in 1990, in Australia, the state of Victoria made safety helmets mandatory for all bicycle riders. While there was a reduction in the number of head injuries, there was also an unintended reduction in the number of juvenile cyclists—fewer cyclists obviously leads to fewer injuries. However, the risk of death and serious injury per cyclist, seems to have increased.

It is believed that the helmet law lead users to take greater risks, believing themselves to be almost immune, and  perhaps overestimating the protection of the helmets. I am not necessarily saying that the helmet law should be reversed. I am talking about our common need to testing all things (1 Thessalonians 5:21), and to be open to the reevaluation when new facts become available. This may seem like common sense, and it is, but it tends to get thrown out of the window the minute we try to deal with controversial issues. My point here is that seemingly good ideas and actions even when motivated by compassion can have unintended negative consequences. And it is helpful to have unemotional examples at hand to establish the principle before moving on to more controversial areas. Of course we need to be informed, and to be open ourselves,  to being shown to be wrong.

Father, we need to test all things and hold to what is good. Help us to be open to being corrected even in the areas of our cherished opinions. Help us to become informed, so that we can humbly engage as Ambassadors for Christ, with wisdom and respect with those with other views. We come to You again this morning Lord, to ask You to help us in these things in Jesus Name Amen