Situational Ethics

[Rebeccalynn_dj]

 A group that I am in has been having weekly ethics question.  So far it has been only been two questions.  One I was very ethical the other, not so much.

This got me wheels turning.  What are ethics and how do we pin one down? 

I am situational-ly ethical.  If you were on trial for murdering I might find you guilty.  If you were on trial for killing a person that got free after raping and murdering your child it is 100% not guilty,  even if it was premeditated.

I have heard politically that babies have a right to life.  They are precious from the moment of conception.  Then I hear from the same people that once they are born they don't have the right to health care.  They don't have the right to any help at all.  Once you are born your life really isn't valuable unless you are killed directly and not slowly.

Then I hear from the opposite side that a person has the right to terminate the life because it is their bodies.  They then believe that you have the right to health care and help to dig your way out of financial pits.

Both sides really have situational ethics to me. Are we facing one subject straight on while turning away from others?  Just something to think about.

I have always said that life is life to me.  So I stand up for all life including murderers.  Then again I don't blame people for wanting to kill their child's murderer.  I also haven't been in a situation that I would have even had abortion cross my mind.

What are your thoughts? 

 

[parrishsky]

Mar. 22, 2010 at 12:42 PM

I do believe it's a woman's body to choose. I believe in Universal Health care for all. I don't have pity for rapists or murderers and I think depending on the crime the death penalty is fitting. Otherwise as long as prison is hell on earth lock them up and throw away the key!

[mainemusicmaker]

Mar. 22, 2010 at 12:52 PM

I agree a lot with parrishsky....although, I think it's fundamentally wrong to terminate a pregnancy just because you made a "bad decision" and had sex.  I could never do it, but that's just me.  I do believe a woman should NOT be judged should she terminate a pregnancy that was due to rape and/or incest or if she was in a very real danger of losing her life.  Situational pretty much describes that view, I think? :)

I have no pity either for murderers or rapists.  I, honestly, believe that the punishment should fit the crime....you slice some one's throat, yours should be sliced, you shoot someone 10 times, you should be shot 10 times...you rape someone and strangle them, then YOU should be raped with an inanimate object and strangled....Yeah, it sounds harsh, but my sympathy does not lie with the murderer/rapist, it lies with their victims and the pain and horror they must have felt before being killed.

Good post, Becca...it actually made me THINK about some things that I normally don't really think about :)

[Lb128f]

Mar. 22, 2010 at 12:57 PM

I believe this is definitely "food for thought!" :-) I'm thinking!

[Kenre]

Mar. 22, 2010 at 6:28 PM

I believe in consequences following all actions. This is nature and I believe that it happens whether another human initiates the consequence or it is done naturally by the Fates.

[Nehalennia]

Mar. 22, 2010 at 7:55 PM

I believe it is about situations. However, there are many people who will only stick with one side, ethical or not. That in itself is an ethical question. The definition of the word gets lost when one's beliefs are brought into it.

It has the potential to be very cyclic.

[Moonrush]

Mar. 22, 2010 at 8:22 PM

I'm not so cure that situational ethics is necessarily a negative thing.  Consistency is good.  But, like Jo mentioned, there are people who will stick with being consistent regardless of the specifics.  Much like people who always vote Democrat or Republican regardless of the actual candidate - they are consistent. 

We are human, and because our nature is so varied and unpredictable, the question of ethics almost HAS to be situational. 

Really interesting journal, Rebecca.  It's got me thinking for sure!

[RanaAurora]

Mar. 22, 2010 at 8:31 PM

I think that cover-all ethics would be much more harmful - and unethical - than situational.  There aren't blanket answers, you know?

[LoveMyDog]

Mar. 23, 2010 at 11:36 AM

You seem to be forgetting the element of responsibility.  Yes, the child has a right to health care and the PARENTS have the responsibility to provide for that health care. The father has the responsibility to provide for the wife, and not sleep around.  And the woman has the responsibility to not sleep around, use birth control if a baby would be a bad choice for her family, and press charges against all rapists.  And if the court system upholds its responsibility then you won't have to worry about murdering your child's murderer or rapist.

[twin_mommy]

Mar. 23, 2010 at 1:32 PM

Situational ethics is huge in our society, especially in our judicial system, which is why we have different sentence lengths for the same crimes.

[WomanOfGod7]

Mar. 23, 2010 at 2:09 PM

The bible says you reap what you sow, and it doesn't matter if the murder is within the womb or outside of the womb.   You'll reap murder through guilt, emotional issues, prison, or whatever.  That's the Truth.