[CS-FSLUG] The Moral Foundation of Free Software

[Don Parris]

I would like to pose a thought to my fellow clergy.  If my thinking is on
target, hopefully it will be apparent to the rest of you.  If my thinking
is flawed, I hope that too will be apparent, as I desire to make sure my
thoughts are pleasing to the Lord and acceptable as well among my peers. 
Also, be advised that my thoughts may be on track, and still need "some
more rails laid down", if you will.  For our purposes, free and open source
are considered as roughly equivalent - both allow redistribution to help
others.

My encounter with RMS, in the wake of "The Penguin Driven Church Office",
got me thinking about the moral issues involved in free - and open source -
software.  One of the reasons Stallman decided to resign from MIT Labs and
develop free software was that he could not in good conscience sign a
non-disclosure agreement.  Doing so would mean he could not help his
neighbor.  In our encounter, and on the WACC website, he suggested that
Christians should be advocates of free software.  Indeed, his Kantian
ethics advocate the Golden Rule, which is a biblical principle (even if not
uniquely so).

It struck me that Stallman understood - even from his atheistic standpoint
- that helping our neighbors is of primary importance.	This is line with
the second of the two primary commandments - namely to love your neighbor
as yourself.  This love we are to have is expressed practically in giving
and sharing.  Thus Paul in Gal 5:13, 14 suggests that we exercise our
freedom, rather than devouring one another.  Earlier on, in vv. 1-ff, Paul
is essentially admonishing the believers for giving up their freedom.  Have
we, who have legally bound ourselves to not helping our neighbors (by
agreeing to a proprietary EULA), voluntarily given up our freedom as well? 
Certainly not to the point of spiritual jeopardy, as is suggested by Paul
with respect to the circumcision.  Still, we are giving up our right to
help our neighbors, by agreeing to not redistribute the software.

Per the incidents where Jesus stirred anger by healing on the Sabbath, the
Law (or at least people's interpretation of it) not only condemned us, it
was restrictive.   Jesus' acts demonstrated God's love for His creation. 
Consider his question in the case of the man with the withered hand - "is
it lawful to do good or to do evil, to save life or to destroy it?"  So,
too, people today (including Christians) seek to restrict our ability to
demonstrate love toward our neighbors by requiring us to agree legally to
not demonstrate that love.  Being the sheep we are, we blindly agree.

How important is it, for us as Christians, to consider the moral
implications of choosing between proprietary and free/open source software?
 I believe that stewardship is one issue that drives Christians to FOSS
solutions.  Technology is another.  But if morality was the driving factor
behind the free software movement, then why isn't it a driving factor
behind the adoption of free/open source software?  Is "ease of use" - one
of the biggest objections to FOSS solutions - really more important than
pleasing God, or helping our neighbors, or saving money so that we can help
our neighbors even better?

I believe strongly that the Church - the whole Church - needs to wrestle
with this issue at some point.	I believe there are enough pastors on this
list and throught the other sites of the Christian FOSS community to engage
in a meaningful dialogue.  If nothing else, I hope you'll at least help me
to clarify some of the issues and correct errors in my thinking.

God bless,
Don
-- 
DC Parris  GNU Evangelist
http://matheteuo.org/
evangelinux at matheteuo.org

Free software is like God's love - you can share it with anyone anywhere anytime!