One of the expected duties of first-responders is to prevent, when possible, men and women from committing suicide. This can range from gentle persuasion to actively overpowering the suicidal person. Tackling him before he jumps from the ledge or the bridge. Wrestling him to the ground to pry the gun from his fingers. That sort of thing.
This raises the question of whether, in good conscience, an Arminian could discharge his duties as a first-responder. If a man has chosen to commit suicide, and you intervene against his will, then, by definition, isn’t that a flagrant violation of his libertarian freedom?
What possible grounds could you have to contravene his freedom choice? Are you going to say that he’s not in his right mind? That he’s in a state of diminished responsibility?
But I thought God endowed all men with sufficient grace. Through sufficient grace, God has restored their freedom to do otherwise. And that, in turn, grounds their moral responsibility. As libertarian agents, they are, at the one and the same time, responsible agents. Responsible for their choices and attendant actions.
If it would even be improper for their Maker to “force” his human agents to act against their wills, then it would be even more improper for a first-responder to do so.
So should our standard application form be revised to include a little box for the applicant to check in case he happens to be an Arminian, open theist, &c.? Shouldn’t their views of moral responsibility disqualify Arminians from working as first responders?