In his defense, “Pap always said there was no harm in borrowing things, if you were going to pay them back, sooner or later; but the widow said it was nothing but a sweet name for stealing, and no good person would do it” (75). Huck is morally conflicted because he has two different belief systems to choose from, forcing him to choose his battle and interpret what is right and wrong on his own terms. On the one hand, his father sincerely believes that the stolen item is borrowed if the thief intends to return it to the original owner. The widow, however, claims that taking everything that has not yet been paid for is theft; there is no loan in the given situation. This pushes Huck to establish his own middle ground and make a compromise between the two. He decides to choose three items that he would never borrow again and this puts him at ease. Upon closer examination, his decision is critical because it shows the evolution of his moral position. He does not follow any of the beliefs imposed on him by his father or his widow. In effect, he adopts a new system to live by, one that better suits his values. Ultimately, Huck does more than challenge society; he rejects the beliefs he was raised in, which gives him the ability to grow in his own system