Religion And Ethics Due 11/8/2020 7 Pm Sunday EST 2-3 Pages ✓ Solved

Religion and Ethics Due 1182020 7pm Sunday Est 2 3 Pages

Review the following ethical dilemmas: 1. John Doe has decided to clone himself. He is sterile. He cannot find anyone to marry him. He wishes to have children. He knows that he will not be able to love a child that is adopted or not connected directly to him biologically. He will be making use of a new procedure that involves taking his skin cells to produce a twin. The twin starts out as an embryo and grows into a child. The child in this case will have the same genetic information as John Doe. John Doe and his child will be twins. 2. Jane Doe is eighteen. For as long as she can remember she has been sexually attracted to other females. Her parents belong to a religion that has a religious text stating that God forbids one to be a lesbian. This religion goes on further to say that lesbians will be punished in the afterlife. Jane Doe is debating whether she should tell her parents about her sexual attraction. She has not yet decided if she should come out to her parents and live as a lesbian now that she is a legal adult. 3. Joe and Mary are a couple. Before becoming sterile, they had a child. This child died of a rare disease. Joe and Mary miss their child terribly. They have heard that there is a new IVF procedure that can ensure that they can have another child. However, their religion forbids using IVF. Instructions Select TWO of the situations above and then address TWO of the following: 1. What is the relation between ethics and religion? Formulate and investigate the relation. 2. For each case, determine the ethical path of conduct. Then, determine what paths of conduct would be unethical. 3. For each case, what would an emotivism say to appraise what you determine is the ethical form of conduct? 4. For each case, would a natural law ethicist agree with what you say is the ethical form of conduct? Why or why not? 5. Articulate, explain, and evaluate in each case an approach that makes use of divine command ethics.

Paper For Above Instructions

The intersection of religion and ethics presents a fertile ground for moral inquiry, particularly in cases involving complex dilemmas faced by individuals grappling with their personal choices versus societal and religious expectations. Two ethical dilemmas that highlight such tensions are John Doe's decision to clone himself and Jane Doe's sexual orientation dilemma within the context of religious beliefs. This paper will explore these cases by examining the relations between ethics and religion, determining the ethical paths of conduct, and incorporating perspectives from emotivism and natural law ethics.

John Doe’s Cloning Dilemma

In the case of John Doe, who wishes to clone himself to have a biological child, the relation between ethics and religion is nuanced. Ethically, one could argue that cloning embodies a form of hubris, as it defies natural reproductive processes. From a religious standpoint, many belief systems may regard cloning as unnatural and potentially sinful, undermining the sanctity of life as a divine creation. Nevertheless, advocates for John may argue that his desire to experience parenthood reflects a fundamental human drive, and hence may be deemed ethically acceptable.

Following an analysis through an emotivist lens, one could posit that John’s intentions are rooted in emotional desires for connection and legacy. Emotivism suggests that ethical statements are expressions of emotional responses rather than objective truths (Ayer, 1936). Thus, supporting John’s cloning decision could align with an emotivist view, as his actions cater to personal happiness and emotional fulfillment. However, opponents might express their emotional disapproval on ethical grounding, framing cloning as an ethical reality devoid of emotional context.

From a natural law perspective, a natural law ethicist might argue against John’s decision, labeling it as an infringement upon natural processes that should govern procreation. Thomas Aquinas’ stance on natural law maintains that actions should align with the natural order prescribed by divine law (Aquinas, 1947). Hence, a natural law ethicist would likely contest John’s choice, asserting that procreation should occur through natural means—thus leading to the conclusion that cloning is ethically impermissible.

Jane Doe’s Sexual Orientation Dilemma

Jane Doe’s predicament illuminates the complexities of navigating personal identity against religious doctrine. The ethical dilemma arises from the conflict between Jane's self-identification as a lesbian and the religious beliefs imposed by her parents. In this case, the relationship between ethics and religion becomes particularly strained, illustrating a tension where ethical acceptance of her identity contrasts sharply with religious teachings that condemn such orientation.

Evaluating Jane’s situation through emotivism reveals that her emotional struggle reflects an innate desire for authenticity and acceptance (Crisp, 2015). Emotivists would likely support Jane’s inclination to embrace her identity, positing that her emotional truth should guide her decisions, even if it conflicts with her parents' beliefs. Conversely, opposing views may arise from emotional responses rooted in fear or disapproval of her sexual orientation, thus complicating ethical discussions further.

Natural law ethicists may also take a critical stance towards Jane’s situation. They could argue that sexual behavior should conform to procreative purposes and the natural order as defined by traditional values (Finnis, 1980). Given that Jane’s identity as a lesbian contradicts the reproductive aspect of sexual ethics espoused by natural law, these ethicists would likely label her sexual orientation as morally wrong. This evaluation raises profound questions about the legitimacy of personal identities when confronted by conventional moral frameworks driven by religion.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the dilemmas faced by John and Jane underscore the intricate interplay between ethics and religion, with diverse perspectives rendering different ethical paths. While emotivism emphasizes emotional undercurrents motivating individuals' actions, natural law ethics offers critical insights regarding conformity to traditional moral principles. Both cases reflect the struggle between personal desires and societal/religious expectations, prompting ongoing discourse about the nature of ethical behavior in a pluralistic society.

References

• Ayer, A. J. (1936). Language, Truth, and Logic. Dover Publications.
• Aquinas, T. (1947). Summa Theologica. Benziger Bros.
• Crisp, R. (2015). The Oxford Handbook of Ethical Theory. Oxford University Press.
• Finnis, J. (1980). Natural Law and Natural Rights. Clarendon Press.
• Frankena, W. K. (1973). Ethics. Prentice-Hall.
• Rachels, J. (2019). The Elements of Moral Philosophy. McGraw-Hill Education.
• Regan, T. (1983). The Case for Animal Rights. University of California Press.
• Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Harvard University Press.
• Smith, M. (2003). An Introduction to Ethics. Cambridge University Press.
• Wong, D. (2006). Natural Moralities: A Philosophy of Ethics. Oxford University Press.