The relation between ethics and religion

  1. John Doe has decided to clone himself. He is sterile. He cannot find anyone to marry him. He wishes to have children. He knows that he will not be able to love a child that is adopted or not connected directly to him biologically. He will be making use of a new procedure that involves taking his skin cells to produce a twin. The twin starts out as an embryo and grows into a child. The child in this case will have the same genetic information as John Doe. John Doe and his child will be twins.
  2. Jane Doe is eighteen. For as long as she can remember she has been sexually attracted to other females. Her parents belong to a religion that has a religious text stating that God forbids one to be a lesbian. This religion goes on further to say that lesbians will be punished in the afterlife. Jane Doe is debating whether she should tell her parents about her sexual attraction. She has not yet decided if she should come out to her parents and live as a lesbian now that she is a legal adult.
  3. Joe and Mary are a couple. Before becoming sterile, they had a child. This child died of a rare disease. Joe and Mary miss their child terribly. They have heard that there is a new IVF procedure that can ensure that they can have another child. However, their religion forbids using IVF.
    Use the resources assigned for this week and additional research,

Select two of the situations above and then address 2 of the following:

  1. What is the relation between ethics and religion? Formulate and investigate the relation.
  2. For each case, determine the ethical path of conduct. Then, determine what paths of conduct would be unethical
  3. For each case, what would an emotivism say to appraise what you determine is the ethical form of conduct?
  4. For each case, would a natural law ethicists agree with what you say is the ethical form of conduct? Why or why not?
  5. Articulate, explain, and evaluate in each case an approach that makes use of divine command ethics.








Student’s Name









The Relation Between Ethics and Religion

In a globe where individuals and organizations are always encountered with multiple moral quandaries, the essence of ethics has never been more fantastic. Ethics are the principles, values, and beliefs managing moral decision-making and behavior. Ethics is involved with right and wrong, virtue and unpleasant, fair and unfair, and it pursues to answer questions on how one behooves to live their lives and treat others. Numerous ethical theories and frameworks developed throughout history involve consequentialism, deontology, good ethics, and care ethics (Zoshak & Dew, 2021). Each perspective provides a distinct approach to determining what is ethical and moral, and each has its pluses and minuses, where ethics plays a critical role in numerous fields like medicine, law, politics, and business, and it is vital for individuals and organizations to have a clear comprehension of ethical principles and values to develop informed and accountable decisions. This essay will explore three distinct case studies, and eventually explain the connection between ethics and religion, the ethical path of conduct in each case determining, the type of paths of conduct that would be unethical, look at what emotivism say to appraise the ethical form of conduct, a natural law ethicist agreeing with the ethical form of conduct, and perspectives making use of divine command ethics.

The Link Connecting Ethics and Religion

The connection between ethics and religion is complex and persistent, with the most distinct approaches and viewpoints. In general, ethics are the principles and values guiding moral decision-making, while religion entails a set of beliefs, practices, and rituals connected to the worship of the higher power or divine being (Liyanapathirana & Akroyd, 2023). Most assert that ethics and religion are inherently related, with religious teachings acting as a basis for moral codes and ethical behavior. Others assert that ethical principles can be obtained from secular sources, stating that religious beliefs are inappropriate for ethical behavior. Arguments continue, with others saying that religion can sometimes be an obstacle to ethical behavior because an individual may use religious beliefs to explain harmful actions or victimize others who do not share their beliefs. Comprehensively, the connection between ethics and religion is a multiplex and refinement one, containing many distinct factors influencing the extent to which they are entwined.

Ethical Versus Unethical Tracks of Conduct: A Conduct for Decision-Making in the Three Cases

The ethical track of conduct in the first case is to acknowledge that cloning a human being develops significant ethical issues required to be contemplated accurately. John Doe should contemplate the possible risk to the cloned child’s health and the psychological effect on the child of being developed solely for their genetic material, including the broader societal suggestions of cloning (Hamann-Rose, 2021). With the risk and unpredictability connected with cloning, John Doe must contemplate choices like adoption, surrogacy or sperm donation. Developing a child through cloning solely to meet his desire for a biological relationship is unethical if it harms the child. For the second case, the ethical truck of conduct is for Jane to be honest to herself, embracing her sexual orientation. Jane should live in a way that keeps her happy and fulfilled, discrimination and judgment-free. Admittedly, her parent’s religion must not hinder her from living her life. In case her parents reject her because she is a lesbian, this would be unethical for them to range their religious beliefs over the love they have for their daughter. It would be brutal and unfair to subject their child to emotional destruction and rejection due to their own beliefs. For the third case, the path of conduct is for Joe and Mary to contemplate the possible benefits and risks of IVF and range them against the principles of their religion. They may also desire to explore other choices, like adoption or fostering. Nevertheless, if they decide to seek IVF, it would be unethical for their religion to hinder them from acquiring this medical treatment, bringing them immense joy and healing (Okechukwu & Emeribe, 2021). Hindering them from acquiring medical treatment and assisting them in having another child would be brutal and unfair, specifically provided the emotional pain and loss already suffered. It would be a contravention of their sovereignty and an obstacle to their ability to develop decisions in their own lives.

Emotivism’s Assessment of the Ethical Path of Conduct in Each Case

Emotivism is a meta-ethical hypothesis stating that moral judgments are not truthful statements but quite the appearance of an individual’s emotions and attitudes towards a specific action or circumstance. An emotivist inspection of the ethical conduct in each case would explore the emotional response of the individuals relatively than objective moral principles. For John Doe’s case, an emotivist would acknowledge his wish to have a biological child and the emotional relationship he pursues with that child. They may also consider the possible ethical concerns surrounding cloning and its implications on society. In Jane Doe’s case, an emotivist is likely to support her right to live her life as if she is okay and express her sexuality flagrantly. They would also recognize the emotional record hiding her sexuality from her parent may have on her and may motivate her to contemplate coming out. In Joe and Mary’s case, an emotivist would acknowledge their deep emotional pain and demand another child. They may also contemplate the possible outcomes of going against their religious beliefs and the effects it could contain on their connection with their faith community. Comprehensively, an emotivist perspective to such cases would range the emotional encounter of the individuals included and recognize the complexity and subjectivity of ethical decision-making.

Inspecting the Ethical Conduct in the Three Cases: A Logical Law Ethicist’s Approach

Concerning John Doe’s choice to clone himself, a logical law ethicist would likely differ with this course of action. Logic law ethics grasp that every human has intrinsic dignity and worth and that human life must be respected and secured from the start to the natural end. Cloning entails manipulating and utilizing the logical process of human reproduction, leading to a discount on the individualism and individuality of human beings (Hansen, 2018). Additionally, the development of a child solely to fulfill one’s own wish may be highlighted as a violation of the child’s intrinsic dignity and worth as a human being. In Jane Doe’s case, a logic law ethicist is likely to assert the intrinsic dignity and worth of every human being, despite their sexual orientation. Logic law ethics grasps that sexual expression must follow the logical approach of human sexuality, the expression of love and the propagation of new life within the context of marriage. This does not indicate that individuals who encounter same-sex attraction are genetically immoral to punishment. Concerning Joe and Mary’s wish to have another child through IVF, a logic law ethicist may have disquiet about the ways by which the child is being brought into existence. Logic law ethics grasp that human reproduction must be grounded in the analytical purpose of sexuality within marriage, where the dishonesty and exploitation of human life through technologies like IVF may violate human dignity and worth (Tham et al., 2022). A logic law ethicist may also acknowledge the profound server and longing that Joe and Mary are encountering, pursuing to provide support and guidance in their search for ethical and life-asserting ways of overcoming their infertility.


Ethics and religion are intimately connected, and they are not the same. Ethics is a system of principles guiding an individual’s behavior, while religion entails a set of beliefs and practices connected to the worship of a higher power. In John Doe’s case, cloning himself is an ethical quandary as it develops questions on the value of human life and the role of science in society. In Jane Doe’s case, being a lesbian is an ethical quandary as it stabilizes the subjective logic of ethical judgment, logical law ethics focuses on the intrinsic value of human life and the necessity of fulfilling an individual’s analytical purpose. Divine command ethics assert that the right course of action is to stick to God’s commands, even if they fight with individual wishes or societal norms. Comprehensively, navigating an ethical quandary needs proper consideration of all relevant factors involving an individual’s beliefs and obligations to others.















Liyanapathirana, N., & Akroyd, C. (2023). Religiosity and accountants’ ethical decision-making in a religious country with a high level of corruption. Pacific Accounting Review35(2), 181-198.

Hamann-Rose, P. (2021). What We Talk About When We Talk About Cloning: A Literature and Bioethics Perspective on Genetic Privacy, Consent and the Family. Journal of Literature and Science14(1-2), 57-77.

Okechukwu, C. P., & Emeribe, J. O. (2021). ETHICAL IMPLICATIONS OF IN VIRTRO FERTILIZATION (IVF) AND HUMAN CLONING THROUGH THE LENS LEON KASS. Journal of African Studies and Sustainable Development4(1).

Hansen, S. L. (2018). Family resemblances: human reproductive cloning as an example for reconsidering the mutual relationships between bioethics and science fiction. Journal of bioethical inquiry15(2), 231-242.

Tham, J., Gómez, A. G., & Lunstroth, J. (Eds.). (2022). Multicultural and Interreligious Perspectives on the Ethics of Human Reproduction: Protecting Future Generations (Vol. 9). Springer Nature.

Zoshak, J., & Dew, K. (2021, May). Beyond kant and bentham: How ethical theories are being used in artificial moral agents. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1-15).

If you are struggling to write your nursing essays or homework because you don’t have time or you don’t know where to start you can order your paper here 

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *