Moral Standings

People from all walks of life face many ethical dilemmas. These dilemmas have consequences. Our worldview determines how we deal with these dilemmas, and guides us to the right decisions. In this essay, I will examine an ethical issues through my Christian worldview. I will also present other viewpoints, and compare them to mine.

Philosophers have studied and analyzed divergent implications and answers to ethical problems and the morality construction in which is the correct way of going about life upon many years. Philosophers have begun to narrow down the cases that provide the best support to answer ethical questions which we encounter. That being, divine command theory, utilitarianism, deontology, and virtue ethics all provide adequate insight to everyday morality. There are flaws and strengths to each and every one of these concepts. However, divine command theory proves to provide the most requisite intellect with minute disfigurement. Divine command theory offers a chance at a purposeful reason to undertake morality with the right

This view, that humans are of special moral status, is constantly attempted to be rationalized in various ways. One such defense is that we are not morally wrong to prioritize our needs

Moral status is a bioethical concept that concerns the type of beings that possess rights, like human beings. There are five distinct viewpoints, or theories, that help in determining moral status. These theories include: a theory based on human properties, a theory based on cognitive properties, a theory based on moral agency, a theory based on sentience, and a theory based on relationships (HLT-302 Introduction 2, 2015). In the case study, a situation in which a fetus develops a rare condition where its quality of life would be poor is presented. The physician (Dr. Wilson), aunt (Maria), mother (Jessica), and father (Marco) all share different viewpoints that make the process of determining a final plan of action very difficult.

In today’s society animals still do not have all the rights that they deserve. We still perform medical experiments, hunt them for “fun” and food, and keep them locked up in cages for “entertainment” at zoos. If animals had rights humans would not be using them for selfish purposes for fun and entertainment. In the article by Jeremy Rifkin it is mentioned that “researchers are finding that many of our fellow creatures are more like us than we had ever imagined. They feel

The subject of morality and ethics is a topic that so many individuals have difficulty understanding: and practicing. Many factor come in to place when thinking of one’s knowledge to treat or behave in an ethical and moral way to consider the feeling of others. Thus, an individual’s culture, religion, and environment may hinder the general idea of morality. In the interview of Martin Luther King Jr: Speech Civil Disobedience and obeying Just vs Unjust laws; he discusses how some laws that have been created: do not make right just because there laws. Likewise, Michael Pollan: An Animal’s Place talks about animal cruelty, and how animals should been have the same rights as human beings. Additionally, new laws can be created to adjust to new ethical and moral laws; that would benefit the way of living for humans and animals.

Jaworska, A., & Tannenbaum, J. (2013). The grounds of moral status. In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy online. E. N. Zalta (Ed.). Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2013/entries/grounds-moral-status/

As I have clarified earlier, neither the claim that non-human animals have no rights nor the claim that our moral obligations to humans need to be equal to those to non-human animals is cogent enough to conclude that we have no moral obligations to non-human animals. We surely do. A relevant example would be the global species conservation efforts. Over the past fifty years, WWF, one of the world’s largest independent conservation organization, had invested over one billion dollars in more than twelve thousand conservation initiatives and helped conserved a number of species, including elephant, giant panda, polar bear, great apes, etc. Dr. Claude Martin, former Director General of WWF International once said, “our objectives have never been clearer - slow climate change, reduce toxics in the environment, protect our oceans and fresh waters, stop deforestation, and save species." One of the major goals of WWF is to promote the biodiversity of ecosystem and habitats that is vital for the health and livelihoods for all the living organisms on earth. Meanwhile, Dr. Claude Martin’s statement does not show that the motive behind conserving endangered species arises solely out of humans’ moral obligation to non-human animals, but our obligations to these

Animal rights are another issue we are facing right now. There are many who believe that they have no rights, others say that they have the same rights as humans and others are in the middle of these two extremes issues. The topic is very complex because if animals have rights which one are those since the only way to protect them is by regulating them on how are they are treated or how can they be used. Animals are used in many ways such as food, medicine, research, cosmetics, cloth and sport among many other ways. Many who believe that the reason animals have no rights is because of the lack perception where they don’t feel or have pain like humans. There is no doubt that animals feel pain or pleasure and just for that reason they have rights, some people say. On the other hand, we cannot compare animals to humans because they are indeed different and for that reason, they cannot have the same rights. For example, animals can’t vote.

Ethics is the moral criteria that we as human beings have. They are the rules of the game that are supposed to guide us through our decision making in life and how to behave to one another as part of a society. However, there are different perspectives on how this criteria should be used, and when and whom they apply to. I will focus on the three most influential moral theories: virtue ethics, deontology, and utilitarianism. Although there are many great names of philosophers that fall in those theories, I will be discussing Aristotle, Kant, and Mill’s perspective, respectively.

Many moral issues confuse people. There are many rights and wrongs in the world, which we cannot help. In the four different arguments I will talk about, there are many similarities and differences. These Arthur’s are Garrett Hardin, Peter Singer, Michael Sandel and Hugo Bedau. These are all people concerned about beliefs in moral issues.

#7 Moral reasoning is individual or collective practical reasoning about what, morally, one ought to do. Philosophical examination of moral reasoning faces both distinctive puzzles

In Ruggiero’s chapter six, A Foundation for Judgment, he claims that there is a moral foundation for judgment that consists of values, ethos, and other ideas that we define as right and wrong. Ruggiero points out that modern moral codes share many parallels with those of ancient cultures; for instance, a moral prescription from ancient China, “Never do to others what you would not like them to do you,” is widely known and accepted as a moral code in the modern world (67). Often times, governmental documents provide a basis for moral action and judgments. Although not often considered, the Declaration of Independence is a collection of moral laws and judgments that teaches us how to act in our daily lives. On a smaller scale, almost all corporations

Ethics and morals are fundamental standards and motivational notions of right and wrong governing the conduct of many individuals that seldom alter. They are the foundations that lead to the success of many people; these foundations implement behavioral rules and demeanors that set oneself distinctively from one another. In the ethical dilemma, the choice presents are between two rights. Whereas in moral issues, the choice is between right and wrong. This leaves the character deliberates complex decision making when confronting the dilemma.

Another argument could be made that having this moral standing is only separating humans and every species, not determining the inequality