The Theory Of God 's Eternal Law

Natural law is a concept with a long history dating back to the Greco-Roman philosophers. Despite some variations among philosophers one point of agreement was understood as “that process in nature by which human beings, through the use of sound reason, were able to perceive what was morally right

Overall, in the process of understanding the relation between social order and the law, the consensus provides a clearer and more radical view. It shows society as what it really is. It presents society as a united force respecting and following the norms as to

At one level, it deals with the inadequacies of the law in addressing to the question of justice and at the same time highlights the importance of the law in a society as even in presence of inadequacies, law is needed as it is better than a state of lawlessness.

To be sure, modern laws are made to express the general will, a will that aims at the common good. This means that laws in most cases intend to protect every social member’s rights under the principle of justice and fairness. For telling examples one need to look no further than American judicial system. The access to the two courts systems, one federal court and one state court, provides citizens with the greatest potential to have their legal problems

Order and freedom are both necessary and beneficial towards the citizens and society with the aim to promote harmony, yet they both contradict each other. This contradiction has existed throughout many years and it is still hard to decide which one is ideal for the society. This essay will discuss and analyze if order or freedom is more important for political systems.

These rights are said to be inscribed in the hearts of all men (Seagrave 2011). Natural law is God’s law that every man can know.

The Law of Nature is discussed greatly in the book Mere Christianity of C. S. Lewis, who asserts that it is the Law of Nature which makes humans obligated to do the right thing. According to Lewis, this law can also be referred as The Real Morality or the Standard to which all people follow, and which people use to evaluate their and others’ behaviors. The Law of Nature tells the people which circumstance is appropriate to execute certain actions, and which situation is not suitable for certain behavior. For instance, in every human, there is a warrior trait, which is said to be necessary by the Law of Nature in order to protect oneself against life-threatening beings, but to be wrong when it is used to injure the innocent people. However, the Law of Nature functions beyond the machinery of evaluating

Ones’ political and social agreement derives from society. Human nature leads to a state of nature, pre-government, which then the social contract rectifies, creating the purpose of government. Before understanding how the

Natural law- the idea that principles of morals and rights are inherent in nature and not human made; such laws are discovered by reason but exist apart from humankind. Positive law-human made law.

Society relies on structure and order; the basic foundation of a fair society is made up of the individual rights and group rights which maintain the peace of a democratic society. Individualism refers to the rights upheld by the individual; the right to participate in political discourse, the right to personal expression, and the right to life. The idea of collective rights appertain to the democratic system which most nations adhere by; laws are made by members of the government which are to be followed by the members of society. These laws, which are created in the views of the majority, are the rights granted to a group of people. Individual rights should be paramount to collective rights to ensure the safety of minorities. Individual

When I think about a political community, I usually associate it with elections, politicians, and advertisements that bad mouth candidates from the different political parties. Politicians try to persuade citizens to vote for them by making promises that they may never fulfill. But a political community is more than that. A comparison of Aristotle and John Locke’s nature and purpose of a political community has given me a new insight. I learned that, even though the political community is responsible to provide security, its main purpose is aimed for the highest good of all its citizens, which is virtue and happiness.

Philosophers base the idea of objective morality on the assumption that some moral ideals are universal and should be the moral responsibility of everyone. Subjective moralists counter this argument by explaining that each moral decision is independent because each moral situation is unique to its own conditions. Ultimately, these two views shape the nature of moral philosophy and theology, each describing the different natures of morality (Hammond). These two theories have a large impact on the thinking process of humans on an everyday basis. This process then leads up to a person valuing different things more than others. The separation of objective and subjective theories all boil down to whether or not a theory is universal or not. A subjective theory has an absence of universal truths, and an objective theory has universal truths. Two vary popular theories that will take part in my research were the Divine Command Theory, and Natural law theory. Two theories that may seem similar, but in fact are very different.

Natural law theorists believe that all law must be morally justified if it can be legitimised as law at all. Legal positivism means the simple contention that it is in no sense a necessary truth that laws reproduce or satisfy certain demands of morality, though in fact they have otherwise done so. (Hart, DATE)

In this paper, I will propose that it is better to look at whether a law is legally valid or not through the perspective of natural law theory as opposed to positivist theory. My argument consists mostly of the language of “improvement” which can only exist based on the theory of natural law which states that law is something which has an objective truth behind it. Only when there is an objective mark to hit can there be hits and misses and I believe that positivism disregards the possibility of hits and misses entirely. So, my argument is that it makes more sense to consider legal validity of a law from the perspective of natural law rather than positive law because it includes not only the previously set up legal system when considering validity, but it also considers the general idea of some kind of morality as well. A sub argument is that the starting legal system must have had some basis by which to have been created and accepted which must be some form or notion of morality.

And so it helps the Government in formulating suitable laws. In pursue its economic and social policies for e.g. law and legal propositions are not find or absolute. They are in the state of becoming. Accepted norms or principles whether statutory or as principle of justice, equity and good conscience are applied again and again to test its voracity or