Natural Law is the law of nature, it is almost created by God. The Ten Commandments are involved and these laws govern the routine of nature. A person who believes in these laws would definitely feel and agree that a war should not be declared on Iraq because it simply affects the normal routine in nature! Those people in Iraq would be living and following the rule of nature but if war is declared; people slaughtered, there is a disturbance in nature; therefore breaking the ‘Natural Laws’ and therefore it is morally wrong and it is against God.
Second Issue – Aborting a deformed foetus:
A person with perceptions connected to Utilitarianism would disagree that the deformed foetus should be aborted because the consequences of the issue is considered before the motive; it is killing a life (no matter what the motive is; i.e. trying to help the foetus), therefore he/she would say that this is morally wrong.
From the Situation Ethics point of view, this issue would be right because it shows Christian love by mainly ending the foetus’ life before it has feeling and senses and realising that he/she is different from others; due to the fact that he is deformed; this shows care and comfort therefore shows Christian love. This obeys the theory of Situation Ethics, therefore it is morally right.
From the Secularisation point of view, this would also be right because only the law of the country is considered; and abortion is perfectly legal in any country; therefore it is morally right.
Natural Law in this case would suggest that it is morally wrong to abort the deformed foetus because although the country’s law suggests that it is legal to do so; it is out of normality to destroy a perfectly healthy but abnormal life, therefore this case would be morally wrong.
Third Issue – Giving the death sentence to a convicted serial killer:
Utilitarianism suggests that again, consequences should be discussed first. The death of a suspect is no way back. What if other evidences are found and will have proved his innocence? What will the authorities do to make up his/her life then? Nothing, because it is impossible. But on the other hand, if there is no life sentence and the suspect was imprisoned for life, he could simply be taken out and be proven not guilty.
Situation Ethics is strongly against this idea of death sentencing suspects. This does not show ANY Christian love at all! In fact it is completely against the rule and teachings of God and Jesus. Jesus said: “Love your neighbour as you would love yourself.” We are not loving by killing suspects. Jesus also said: “ When your enemy punches you on one cheek, you should turn the other cheek.” This teaches us to forgive; we are not forgiving by taking revenge; therefore this argument suggests that it is morally wrong to perform death-sentences.
Secularisation will strongly agree to the theme Death Sentencing. Because the thinking and perception of Secularisation is only based on the country’s law. In a country with the act of death sentencing, a person with perceptions of Secularisation would agree to putting a criminal to death because the law says so, without considering any forms of Christian love, or any morality.
According to Natural Law the theory of death sentencing will definitely be wrong and against God. The motive is wrong in the first place. It does not follow the theory of Natural Law and of course it does not follow the rules of morality.
The fourth Issue – A couple receiving NHS treatment for I.V.F:
Utilitarianism suggests that if the action taken can cause the production of joy within a number of people while harming no one, then the action is morally right. Therefore it would be right in terms of Utilitarianism that the couple should be allowed to have IVF treatment because the couple who have been longing to have children will finally received one (or two), and then they would achieve what they wanted and therefore they would be happy, Utilitarianism is achieved.
Situation Ethics will be completely against this statement, because this treatment is opposing God’s ‘program’ and order of life. We are changing God’s will by altering his program of our lives and his will of someone who should not have any children, it is all decided by God, we are using the knowledge he has provided us (development of thoughts and ideas, science developments), to go against him. It is completely disobeying the laws God gave us and therefore it does not show any Christian love, and it is morally wrong.
Secularisation says that the law should be considered in the decision, not the religious beliefs. IVF treatments are legally permitted by the law, therefore it is perfectly right to carry out this treatment in this country where lawful permission has been given.
Natural Law means the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church and the order and system in which nature works. Having IVF treatments will definitely have conflict against the beliefs of the Church and it breaks down the order of nature. How is IVF treatment going to be carried out in nature (without any forms of technology)? Therefore if IVF treatments are continued to be legal, then there will still be a conflict between the two theoretical statements.