The Overuse of "Natural Law"


It is possible to use "natural law" to condemn or promote most any behavior. The common pattern of argument is to say, "That behavior violates natural law," and pretend the argument is settled in your favor. A scholar in the field says using natural law to argue in this way does a disservice to the origin of the concept.

The philosopher link author says there is considerable disagreement among those who devote much of their lives studying natural law. He says it is best in invoke the concept only after all the various ramifications and consequences have been considered. It does not work well, he says, as a reason to approve or disapprove of some act or belief. 

I found the link interesting when it delved into what he called "practical" issues in natural law. He says it applies best to ground level questions of life, health, knowledge, friendship, virtue and religion. His expanded essay on the "practical" aspects seemed to track with economics and the general idea that competing ideas clash and those which build the most successful societies survive and others disappear. There is in a sense a marketplace for ideas and inferior products are weeded out eventually. It seems to me quite "natural" the world has always worked this way.

I've seen "natural law" invoked to condemn homosexuality and abortion. I never paid much attention to the application of "natural law" to these but I suppose it would be something like, "It is natural law that humans need to reproduce themselves. Therefore, homosexuality and abortion go against natural law."

But, looking at our link's practical issues we see life, health, knowledge, virtue and religion play a role in decisions that apply "natural law." All of these issues can be advanced when a person who is attracted to the same sex is accepted and allowed to thrive. The same is true, maybe even more so, for women who need an abortion. Abortion saves lives of women, saves their health and conforms to some religious beliefs. 

The link discourages use of natural law to justify political arguments. It has been used several times on this blog by commenters who seem, to  me at least, to have little going for them so they hide behind it. As the link author advises, natural law was not meant to be used in this way. 


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Maybe the "Original Sin" Should be Reassigned

Image
We can all agree most Catholic priests are fine people and not guilty of sexual abuse. What Catholics must face, however, it that their church harbors executives who are dishonest . There is an incredible story about the Argentine Bishop Zanchetta. The Pope worked with him in Argentina and they are considered friends. Around 2015 Zanchetta sent nude pictures of himself and they began circulating world wide. He also was too friendly with young seminarians and some left because of him.  Three different officials say they made formal complaints to the Vatican about Zanchetta between 2015 and 2017. Yet, in 2018, the Vatican claimed it was unaware of any complaints about Zanchetta. This might be a good time to repeat the Catholic hierarchy claims to have the sole authority handed down from Jesus to what the faith stands for. It condemns as sinners those who practice birth control, have abortions and gay sexual relationships. Handing the hierarchy this responsibility would make som
Read more

The Religious Capitol Invaders May Yet Win

Image
So much about U.S. society and religion can be learned from the Civil War and what happened afterwards. After its defeat, the South started a myth about the unethical soldiers from the North. The South fought for principles of God and states rights. The North did not. It was the South, this propaganda told the country, that had the high moral ground.  The Capitol invaders, encouraged by Trump, swallowed the myth that Biden's election was stolen. Thus, they think they held and still hold the high moral ground. This was reinforced by the cross and prayers during the invasion. Even with Trump is gone, we will see political opportunists like Senators Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley stroking crowds and feeding the same lies as Trump. Like "the South will rise again" these gullible followers will talk of victory over the unclean. After the Civil War the South rallied around the phrase, Lost Cause. For decades, and maybe to this day, there are ceremonies remembering fallen martyrs, Re
Read more

Father Frank Pavone, the Ultimate Crook

Image
Recently, the Vatican defrocked Frank Pavone. His diehard fans are outraged. This is because he cleverly manipulated his fans and the press all the while living well from donations and, apparently, abusing some women. By making abortion the "sin" of the century, and himself the main opposition to this one sin, he himself could get away with any sin he pleased.  As the link points out, Pavone was the perfect priest for the Trump era. Trump is so self-important laws have no role in his life. He felt accountable to no one. Women were there to be had. Pavone and Trump are interchangeable.  Pavone was very successful raising money. In his mind, abortion was so important in Catholic beliefs and he was so important in anti-abortion the money he raised opposing it was his to do with what he liked. The Catholic Church, the brand name he used to raise this money, thought the money belonged to it. When he gave the Vatican the bird, it gave him walking papers. With polls showing the majo
Read more