Thesis Statement: This paper intends to discuss that morality should not be the basis of creating laws in the Philippines because it is bias on religion, it is against individual choices and it leads to discrimination
INTRO
(1.1) The reliance of laws to religion could be traced back to the ancient period. The mentality of the ancient romans in particular is quite the same with the mentality of the modern Filipinos. They follow the mentality set by their religion because of the fear of the consequences of the afterlife (Edwords, 1985). Hence, not much has changed with how laws are created. Certain house bills slowly progress because of cult mentality which affects laws. For instance, it took ten years before the RH-law has been passed because of the endless arguments that the religious groups has voiced out (RHbill ORG, n.d.). Laws should adapt to the change of the modern era; it should not base its heart on religion, rather, to true equality.
(1.2) There are bills such as the Divorce Bill that have not been approved because of issues on morality. One of the reasons is that most people look at the ethical part of the doing of a person rather than their reasons. People may judge the couple’s virtues and morality before knowing the reason of their separation. Another is that an authority like the Church, from the Catholic religion who dominates a large percentage of the Philippines, will not confirm the Divorce Bill because it is against their teachings. It would be wrong for them, as well as the Catholic religion, to separate a couple who vowed, and was united at the church during their marriage. This is perhaps the reason behind using the bible as a basis for the said morality, since the bible provid...
... middle of paper ...
...lieves in one’s free will. How is an individual able to do what he or she wants freely if judgements and punishments are awaiting him or her when the act to be done is bad? Clearly, free will is not noticed in those situations.
Aside from those, people have different perspectives. Ethical relativism claims that people from different cultures follow different standards of right and wrong; that everyone differs from following a specific branch of ethics. A person’s action is dependent upon the society where he or she is at; it varies from a culture to another (Timbreza, 2008 in Velasco, 2013).
Hence, morality as a foundation of laws does not equate to equality because it is bias . Similar to what is explained in 4.0, the inequality of same sex marriage is the aftermath of the individual need to follow societal norm on religion that leads to discrimination.
... I have already mentioned above, Algos comprise the least part of the population of the Republic of Jarth, so there is a great chance that even in the Parliament their quantity will be less represented in comparison with the other ethnic groups. We are also aware that the party in which the members of the Algo will most likely support will not be able to convince the rest to introduce the law in the form we desire for it to be. For that reason, it is why it will be better for Algos if the law could be reviewed by the judges (maybe even become a subject to change) and not be introduced without doubt, like it always happens under parliamentary sovereignty.
There are many influences on the way our law is formed and it can come
Morality is important in people’s daily lives. It shapes how people think and act. By acting according to some certain moral standards, people are expecting some positive results. With the right moral standards, people will act the right way, and the society will run better. True morality will build a Utopia, which people dream of. Since morality is a complex and abstract idea, people argued about moral standards everyday, and there seems to be no absolute answers. To fully understand why and how some moral standards are right while others are wrong, we need to figure out the base of moral standards. This paper will talk about two philosophy ethical theories: moral skepticism and moral objectivism. Shafer-Landau argues for moral objectivism
Laws are structured and implemented to benefit the masses. Unfortunately this objective is not always achieved. The constitution of the states is considered the best work of law yet it is unable to save the life of a child. Clearly the problem of violence is turning more into a socio-cultural and psychological problem than a legal one. However laws still need to be implemented justly in order to preserve the freedom and rights of me...
Religion plays a lot of roles in many different cultures. Most things are religion based like in the United States. We are based off Christianity in many different things. In East and Southeast Asia, religion had a big role in shaping the modern history.
laws is to keep the bad things out from the old society out such as
In every society around the world, the law is affecting everyone since it shapes the behavior and sense of right and wrong for every citizen in society. Laws are meant to control a society’s behavior by outlining the accepted forms of conduct. The law is designed as a neutral aspect existent to solve society’s problems, a system specially designed to provide people with peace and order. The legal system runs more efficiently when people understand the laws they are intended to follow along with their legal rights and responsibilities.
The main argument that circles natural law and positive law is whether or not morality can be distinguished from law, and if it can is it then justifiable to criminalize those who are...
Vaughn first defines ethical relativism by stating that moral standards are not objective, but are relative to what individuals or cultures believe (Vaughn 13). Rachels says that cultural relativism states “that there is no such thing as universal truth in ethics; there are only various cultural codes,
The matter of religion in relation to law is an age old question that many generations of people have had to face. In fact, in some ancient civilizations, religion was as much a part of the law, as water is a basic human necessity. Leaders were often worshiped as messengers or children of gods, and sometimes even as gods themselves. Religion has shaped the backbone of many a community, and still today, in some parts of the world, it is a force to be reckoned with. However, it is in my belief, that the religious and moral values of an area should not influence the laws that people are meant to abide by. Not only because many people do not share the same religious beliefs (or even have a religion for that matter), but because in doing so, it allows for the possibility that people will try to take advantage of the system and commit acts that are morally unjust, in the name of their religion.
Ethical relativism is the theory on the moral norms practiced within the society to determine whether an action is right or wrong. In other words, a society’s practices judge its own moral standards. In ethical relativism, anthropologist believed there are no standards that apply across the universe for all people at all times. Objectively, nothing is right or wrong. In determining the definition of right and wrong, it depends on a particular culture, or historical period prevailing view. The majority rule determines the terms of right and wrong.
In explaining Cultural Relativism, it is useful to compare and contrast it with Ethical Relativism. Cultural Relativism is a theory about morality focused on the concept that matters of custom and ethics are not universal in nature but rather are culture specific. Each culture evolves its own unique moral code, separate and apart from any other. Ethical Relativism is also a theory of morality with a view of ethics similarly engaged in understanding how morality comes to be culturally defined. However, the formulation is quite different in that from a wide range of human habits, individual opinions drive the culture toward distinguishing normal “good” habits from abnormal “bad” habits. The takeaway is that both theories share the guiding principle that morality is bounded by culture or society.
Many theories attempt to explain ethical standards and how certain cultures perceive these standards or practices. When explaining certain ethical standards Cultural Relativism is an failed illogical theory for many reasons. Cultural Relativism is a theory that attempts to explain an idea that no culture is superior to any other culture and that all people’s perspectives are biased by their own cultural background. Generally, it is the opinion that all cultures are of equal value and equality to each other, therefore, there is no one culture is inferior to any other.
I think in order to uphold the justice of Malaysia, a part of the morality should be mandated by law, but another part of morality cannot be mandated to the law. This is because as mentioned above, moral's right or wrong cannot be clearly measured, it is based on personal conscience. However, the law can be clearly measured whether a person makes mistakes and will be punished according to law. However, we cannot include all moral principles in the law. This is because if we include all moral in the law, it may become illogical and unnecessary. For instance, Immanuel Kant is a philosopher and he says law adjusts people's external relations, while morality
Complete free exercise of will inhibits individual and societal freedom. According to Mill, one may act as one chooses unless one is inflicting harm onto others. He argues that one is free to behave “according to his own inclination and judgment in things which concern himself” as long as “he refrains from molesting” (64). The problem arises in the freedom allowed to the individual performing the potentially dangerous act. People are often blinded by the situation in which they are in and by their personal motives which drive them to act. Humans, by nature, have faults and vices that are potentially harmful. It is the responsibility of society to anticipate harm, whether to oneself or to others. Once dangerous patterns and habits are recognized it is imperative to anticipate and prevent injury from reoccurring. To allow any individual to be inflicted harm forces citizens to lose tr...