Paper Example on Killing: An Ethical Perspective

Introduction

Generally, human beings are of the consensus that killing is not good. However, there are certain exceptions that debates are surrounding these exceptions. According to McMahan (4) that our concept of life determines whether killing in certain situations is acceptable or not. For instance, the author explains that abortion debates often get argued from the perspective of whether life begins at birth or conception and whether a fetus should be accorded the same status as other human beings. On the other hand, the author also outlines that persons in a state of vegetative coma have the same status as normal human beings (5). Abortion of fetuses and euthanizing persons in a continuous state of irreversible coma are areas surrounding by debates as far as killing is concerned. From a deontological perspective, the act of killing taints the soul of the person committing the act irrespective of the circumstances (428). For instance, a soldier who kills an enemy during a war will still have their souls tainted even if the act prevented the enemy from killing them, or killing soldiers of his troop. Such an outlook of killing inherently argues that killing is evil whatever the circumstances.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

In his treatise, Marx (438) observes a connection between abortion and euthanasia as a far as proponents of these forms of killing are concerned. The author explains that although life scientists recognize that life begins at conception and does not necessarily end when a person is brain dead, proponents of such forms of killings still come up with arguments to justify abortion and euthanasia. Proponents of abortion and euthanasia give fetuses and persons in a state of the irreversible coma a position that is a little lower than that of normally functioning human beings. Fetuses are unable to speak and argue their case, and the same applies to persons suffering from an irreversible coma. In essence, they get accorded a state that is lower than that of human beings. Abortion on medical grounds is often done to save the life of the mother in a situation where the fetus poses a risk to the mother. In this case, there is often the dilemma of either saving the fetus or the mother. Legislations in the U.S. give priority to the mother as explained by Marx (384). The reason for such consideration from the legal perspective is that the law does not recognize the fetus as a human being despite the explicit knowledge that the fetus is a functioning organism. Patil, Dode, and Ahirrao (546) explain that the reason abortion is sometimes acceptable from a clinical perspective is the fetus, although considered as an organism, cannot exist independently outside the mother.

Furthermore, there are certain situations where the fetus is malformed to the extent that it would not survive after birth. However, from a deontological and religious perspective explained by Marx (386) no one has the right to determine whether another individual should live or not. In such situations, nature should be left to take its natural course.

The Bible argues against killing and even has a commandment against the act; "Thou Shall not Kill." However, the scriptures also provide exceptions where killing can be acceptable. For instance, there are various instances in the Old Testament where God actually ordered his servants to commit murder or even supported such actions. For example, the Israelites used their army to kill enemies during their journey from Egypt to Canaan. Although killing is an evil act, there are certain instances where murder is acceptable. The only problem is finding the grounds to justify the specific cases where killing is allowed.

Introducing the Holy Spirit and Ethics

The Holy Spirit constitutes and essential aspects of the life of Christians because it is one of the entities in the Holy Trinity. Furthermore, the Holy Spirit mediates between Christians and Jesus Christ. Therefore, the Holy Spirit allows Christians to follow the will of Christ and that of God the father. Christianity as a religion is based on critical moral principles that guide followers. The Holy Spirit as an entity strengthens Christians so that they can have strong moral principles.

In the modern world, ethical principles are mostly marred in controversies because man continuously attempts to conceptualize things rather than follow the provisions of the scriptures. The role of the Holy Spirit is to guide Christians to follow the morals written in the scriptures. The Holy Spirit is not some source of ethics where one can consult on issues about ethics and morals. The Holy Spirit is the enforcer of ethics and an authority on this issue. Most Christians have relegated the position of the Holy Spirit and will seldom acknowledge the role it plays. As a result, Christians find themselves confused by legal and philosophical debates surrounding morals and ethics. Wells and Quash (94) explain that the Holy Spirit provides clarity and rescues Christians from the legal and philosophical discussions surrounding contentious ethical issues. The authors recognize the central role played by the Holy Spirit in the life of Christians. The Holy Spirit as an entity occupies the life of all Christians because when Jesus ascended to heaven, he did not wish to leave Christians alone without a helper. Therefore, the main reason Christ left the Holy Spirit is that he knew that there were chances that Christians would be drawn into ethical debates from legal and philosophical perspectives.

In essence, it is baseless for Christians to be drawn in ethical debates because they already have the Holy Spirit that is an authority in such issues.

Criminal Punishment

The article "Criminal Punishment" looks at the various philosophies used to justify the punishment of criminals. The article explains that the modern penal codes for various crimes show that the criminal and justice system operate on a retributive principle rather than rehabilitative. The report looks at the multiple assertions used by the criminal and justice system to justify the act of punishing criminals. However, the author of the article also explains that none of the philosophical provisions can stand alone when seeking to understand the operation of the criminal and justice system. The author describes that one should approach the issue from a deontological, utilitarianism, and retributive perspectives to understand the activities of the criminal and justice system.

The first point argued by the author is that neither utilitarianism or retributive philosophies can stand alone when it comes to an understanding of the concept of punishing criminals. The article poses the question of the end objective of punishing criminals. Mot criminal justice systems will assert that the primary reason for punishing criminal is to rehabilitate them so that they can integrate back in the society as reformed individuals. However, this is not always the case as some people come out of jail worse than they were before. Most criminal justice systems are yet to come up with comprehensive approaches that can ensure that criminals get rehabilitated. Rehabilitation also largely depends on whether the criminal feels remorseful for their actions. There are instances where people are convicted wrongfully due to flaws in the criminal justice system. From the retributive point of view, the objective of the criminal and justice system is to seek justice for the victim of the criminal act. In this case, the focus is not on the criminal but the victim. The justice clause of the criminal and justice system looks at the predicament of the victim and is of the assumption that when the criminal gets punished, it amounts to justice for the victim. The author states the two concepts when used together can promote understanding of the operations of the criminal and justice system and perhaps justify the act of punishing criminals (225). The objective is twofold. The first objective focusses on the criminal and seeks to rehabilitate the criminal so that they can integrate back in the society reformed and functional. The second objective is to find justice for the victim of the crime.

The second point made in the article is that it is necessary for the criminal and justice system to do something in addition to punishment to meet the requirements of justice. The author explains that the retributive concepts in the criminal justice systems are counterproductive because criminals end up being worse than they were before incarceration. The author observes that there is a need to come up with approaches that can improve the behavior of the criminal. The first aspect that the system should concentrate on is to encourage the criminal to feel remorseful about their actions (Wells and Quash 226). In essence, the author proposes a migration from the retributive approach towards utilitarianism that looks the consequences of punishment for both the victim and the criminal.

Works Cited

Marx, Paul. "Abortion/ Euthanasis." Dadun University. Print. 29 October 2018.

McMahan, Jeff. The Ethics of Killing: Problems at the Margins of Life. London, UK: Oxford University Press, 2002. Print.

Patil, Alka, Pranil Dode and Amruta Ahirrao. "Medical Ethics in Abortion." Indian Journal of Clinical Practice Vol. 25 No. 6 (2014): 544-552. Print.

Wells, Samuel and Ben Quash. Introducing Christian Ethics. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2017. Print.