4 The Role and Influence of Religions in Bioethics * (original) (raw)
Related papers
2016
Abstract: In this paper, we thoroughly investigate the various solutions proposed to solve the problems of transplantation system in Romania. Three types of solutions are especially envisaged: legislative ones, institutional ones and cultural/religious ones. We carefully analyze the main ethical and logistical arguments on presumed consent and its alternatives in Romania: family consent provided by the relatives and mandated choice. Special attention is dedicated both to institutional solutions (organizational, educational and information issues) and to religious arguments and motivations, for there were several indicators of their importance for Romanian bioethical discourse in general and for their prevalence in transplantation debates in particular.
Religious Perspectives on Bioethics, Part I
Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal, 1994
Many sections of this volume address issues where religion impacts health policymaking. Africa, the Middle East, Europe, Latin America, and Asia are highlighted for the varied ative act; (2) they introduce third parties into reproduction; (3) they may confuse biological lineage; (4) some technologies involve discarding embryos, which many faiths construe as immoral abortion; (5) the technologies dehumanize the reproductive process; and (6) the association of some technologies with commercialization and exploitation makes them illicit. Brody also addresses the specific concerns of Catholics, Lutherans, Jehov-ah's Witnesses, Anglicans, Greek and Eastern Orthodox, Muslims, and Jews. Brody, Baruch A., ed. Suicide and Euthanasia: Historical and Contemporary Themes. Boston: Kluwer Academic, 1989. 286 p. Both Jewish and Christian perspectives on euthanasia and suicide through the ages are covered in this historical survey. Cahill, Lisa Sowie. In Vitro Fertiliza-[157]
Religious Perspectives on Bioethics, Part 2
Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal, 1994
This is Part Two of a two part Scope Note on Religious Perspectives on Bioethics. Part One was published in the June 1994 issue of the Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal (KIEJ), and as a separate reprint. This Scope Note has been arranged in alphabetical order by the name of the religious tradition. Contents for Parts 1 and 2 Part 1 (see Scope Note 25, KIEJ 4(2)) I. General VI. Hinduism II. African Religious Traditions VII. Islam III. Bahá'í Faith VIII. Jainism IV. Buddhism and Confucianism IX. Judaism V. Eastern Orthodoxy Part 2 I. Native North American Religious Church of Jesus Christ of the Traditions.
Religious corrective to secular bioethics
Studia Bioethica - vol. 2 (2009) n. 3 , pp. 48-54
This paper discusses the place religious ethics has in current bioethical discussions. Relgious input can supplement and complement the contemporary debates in different ways, by offering alternative imagination and wisdom on questions regarding health, sickness, suffering, and death.
Bioethics, Theological Bioethics, and Human Life
Philippiniana Sacra
On this study, I will reflect on "Bioethics, Theological Bioethics, and Human Life." I will deal first with the nature of bioethics; then with theological bioethics; and, finally, with human life as the central concern of bioethics. There is not need to insist on the relevance of bioethics. We read newspapers, magazines and journals of public interest; we watch the news on television or movies; we navigate on the web..., what do we read and see very often? Issues and problems directly connected with bioethics. A few examples: Dolly the sheep and human cloning, Dr. Kevorkian, and physician assisted suicide (PAS), the Human Genome Project (to map and sequence our genetic code), IVF and ET (in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer, respectively), Baby Fae with a baboon heart and organ transplants and xenotransplants (or organ transplants from other species of animals to humans), surrogate motherhood (imagine: a child today may have five parents), genetic engineering and so forth. And the latest issue? A possible implantation of brain chips to improve mental capacity and memory. Facing these issues, the ethical question is: What can he done should it be done? Is it right, good? A challenging question in our world dominated by science and technology!
Bioethics and religions: Religious traditions and understandings of morality, health, and illness
Health Care Analysis, 2003
For many individuals, religious traditions provide important resources for moral deliberation. While contemporary philosophical approaches in bioethics draw upon secular presumptions, religion continues to play an important role in both personal moral reasoning and public debate. In this analysis, I consider the connections between religious traditions and understandings of morality, medicine, illness, suffering, and the body. The discussion is not intended to provide a theological analysis within the intellectual constraints of a particular religious tradition. Rather, I offer an interpretive analysis of how religious norms often play a role in shaping understandings of morality. While many late 19th and early 20th century social scientists predicted the demise of religion, religious traditions continue to play important roles in the lives of many individuals. Whether bioethicists are sympathetic or skeptical toward the normative claims of particular religious traditions, it is important that bioethicists have an understanding of how religious models of morality, illness, and healing influence deliberations within the health care arena.
Iranian Journal of Biomedical Law and Ethics, 2020
Background: Application of modern medical and bio sciences and also that of modern biotechnologies to human life, during the last decades, have left impact on and indeed changed traditional religious and moral attitudes. Use of such sciences and technologies has given rise to unprecedented moral and religious discussions which could not be justified and fruitful without taking into consideration of foundations of moral judgments. This is more significant in Islamic societies in which religion plays a considerable role in formation of moral beliefs and legal rules. Methods: This research is a philosophical study by means of conceptual and critical analysis. Results: Taking into account recent biotechnological developments and normative problems arising from them, it is necessary to study religious and moral approaches to these problems and evaluate various types of theorizing on bioethical problems. Conclusion: In this paper, upon discussing and evaluating (religious) theological and textualist approaches to bioethics, it is attempted to put forth a justifiable religious approach to bioethical problems.
A response to irreligious bioethics
Studia Bioethica 6.2-3 (2013), 12-19.
The relationship between faith and reason is a hot topic today. Continually, there is a certain prejudice that religion is divisive and should be looked upon with a hermeneutics of suspicion. Thomas Murray recently published the article “In Defense of Irreligious Bioethics” in The American Journal of Bioethics, and claims that bioethics should avoid religious input in its normative analysis. This article will critique his proposal by situating “irreligious bioethics” in framework of faith and reason in bioethics. Murray’s position is an inheritance of an Enlightenment bias which considers religious input as detrimental to the well-being of society. His emphasis on irreligious bioethics as a normative approach is compared to the Catholic method of bioethics which begins with natural law reason and is later confirmed by faith. Murray has put too much reliance on reason, and underestimates the presence of rationality within religion and theology. While he is correct that reason can have a function to check the possible pathologies of religion, we take him to task of not recognizing the possible excesses of reason and how religion can help purify it.
Biomedical ethics. Contributions of religion in the field of research and biomedical practice.pdf
As a general rule, bioethical debates deal with the questions raised by scientific-technical breakthroughs in the field of research and biomedical practice. The swiftness with which these advances take place calls into question whether moral philosophy —and in particular theological ethics— can provide answers to the new questions raised, or whether it should capitulate to strategic ethics. Can a ethics without principles solve all the matter in these area and valorize the dignity of human person without damaging the rights of conscience? In the last few months, the Journal of Medical Ethics has reignited the debate about the place of religion in medical ethics.