response to prompt 500-600 words
My approach to metaethics was the use of the Divine Command Theory and Social Contract Theory. I believe that the Divine Command Theory up hold the Ten Commandments and that by following those Ten Commandment my actions will be morally correct. One of the challenges to the Divine Command theory is that, when it comes to God we will be forced to comply or compromise. Social Contract Theory states, “that each society has its own social contract, and that the contract of one society may differ significantly from that of another.” There are several norms that govern our culture. Culture is simply defined as, “the way we do things around here.”
When we look at the case method approach Sexuality and apply the Divine Command theory we know that the word of God tells us in 1 Corinthians 6:18 that “Fleefrom sexual immorality. Every other sin[e] a person commits is outside the body, but the sexually immoral person sins against his own body.” (ESV) There are many Christians who tend to compromise the word of God when it comes to sex rather than comply. In the case, we saw that the brother which was a lector in the catholic church comprise to the word of God for his children. He accepted and allowed the daughter to have sex before marriage and to provide contraception. Which is against the word of the catholic church.
When the social contract theory is applied to the case method approach Sexuality this is where the society and our culture gives us a grey area. In the world, today it is social acceptable for couples to cohabitate before marriage. I even see some of what I would call the stricter cultures are relaxing their standards on premarital cohabitation. We must ask is it moral or immoral for one to cohabite before marriage. When you live in a culture or society where this is acceptable we have a dilemma to partial obey the will of God. Partial obedience is not good in the eyes of God. So how do you judge one who feels that it is socially acceptable to do things in life that contradict the word of God. It is not our job to judge a person. God is the only one who sits at the seat of judgement.
When the subject of sexuality comes up it is a tough discussion to hold. It’s almost as bad as talking politics with someone. Everybody has their own opinion of the true and correct way. Whether that way is set by the divine command theory or by social contract theory. We as Christians should be careful not to judge someone for their decisions on marriage, divorce, cohabitation. Before I got saved I thought it was ok to cohabitate before marriage. Me and my wife lived together. When I got saved before I got married and studying the word of God we made to decision to live separate till we got marriage. I was doing what was acceptable in my culture at that time. It was all knowing upon growing up that it was okay to live with someone without being married.
After reading your classmates’ threads, choose one to which you will respond, then write a reply that interacts with your classmate’s thread and presents a well-reasoned alternative to your classmate’s approach to the issue. You do not have to defend a position that is diametrically opposed to your classmate’s position, but you do need to critically evaluate your classmate’s position in a way that points out strengths and possible weaknesses.
The goal of this is to help your classmate to improve his or her ability to logically and consistently apply his or her metaethical theory to an issue in applied ethics. Hence you should make your criticisms constructive. Be charitable – don’t assume that your classmate is making stupid mistakes, but instead where multiple interpretations are possible, assume that you classmate meant whichever interpretation would make more sense. However, don’t hesitate to point out disputable assumptions, faulty arguments, and alternative possibilities if you are convinced that they exist. In short, criticize politely. If possible, you must reply to a classmate to whom no one else has yet replied. Treat your classmate’s opinion with sensitivity and respect.