(2) She made him an accessory to a crime.
(3) She stole his gift instead of investing actual effort to save up and purchase it.
I know the world will always have its share of thieves and liars, but I’m still always a little taken aback when people are shameless enough to celebrate it.
The bare minimum for “marriage material” would have been putting thought into his gift before his birthday, buying it, wrapping it, and surprising him with it.
1. She turned out not be marriage material
2. Y'all are way too sensitive about a teenage girl who shoplifted one time.
It’s about how you framed and excused your behavior.
No need for excuses whatsoever - if someone on here has a stolen book they want to gift me, I'll accept it with no shame or guilt. The joke wasn't meant to be an excuse, but for what it's worth, my emotional frame towards what she did is gratitude.
I'd love to discuss this with you, since we have interestingly divergent viewpoints on how I should have reacted. Feel free to hit me up: the.jesus.aviles [at] gmail.com
Knowingly accepting stolen property is both unethical and illegal.
This isn’t an unexplored ethical frontier; I appreciate the offer for further discussion, but I don’t think there’s anything novel either of us can contribute on the subject.
Sounds to me like the basic conflict here is the OP holds to expressive individualism of the sort historian Carl Trueman describes in his book, The Rise and Triumph of the Modern Self [0]; while the commenter appears to believe that moral/ethical reality exists external to human persons, thus stealing and being an accessory to theft are wrong, regardless of one's emotional frame.