Religious relativism: Should each adherent to a religion follow the religious la

Religious relativism: Should each adherent to a religion follow the religious laws of one’s own religion, assuming they are clear? In other words, for others who follow different religions that you do not accept, should they strive to do what their religion teaches or should they strive to follow some neutral, true-for-all standards of right conduct?
One area in recent times in which American opinion has undergone a dramatic shift is on the subject of gay marriage. How do you see religion playing a role in this discussion? What are the strengths or weaknesses of these religious-based contributions? For example, should we understand “marriage” with a religious or religious-traditional framework?
On some points, religious tradition seems to make moral recommendations that go well beyond what is in original religious texts. For example, religious views on abortion, contraception, natural purposes, social and family structure, all seem to come from tradition more than text. In what ways do you think religious tradition is a strong source of moral guidance? Should religious tradition be given respect as one of the important bases for moral convictions?
In recent politics, the issue has come up that the new Affordable Care Act requires medical insurance providers to include coverage of birth control. Some parties have objected that this violates their religious freedom because supporting birth control is contrary to their religious beliefs. Should they be given an exemption? Is this a slippery slope to lots of others objecting to being forced to support things they don’t want to support?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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