Natural Law Theory: The Morality Of Euthanasia

has a tendency to cloud the likelihood of censuring law on other than absolutely moral grounds. In any case, the truth of the matter is that law must be assessed by reference to its viability, general accommodation, straightforwardness and numerous different components, and in addition by reference to the requests of Justice and ethical quality. If two people disputing about the morality of euthanasia were to agree to accept the verdict of a third party, any finality so obtained would be illusory. For even after judgment was given either party could still question the moral correctness of the “judge’s” verdict. Moral disputes, unlike legal disputes, remain permanently open. By critisizingthe idea of Natural Law Theory, it is dubious that the innate way of human conduct sets up loss of conduct similarly as it might set up loss of conduct for creatures. The two supporters of Natural Law Theory to be specific Thomas Acquinas and Aristotle vary in their perspectives about the part of God in the nature. Human conduct might be liable to the earth to which a man is presented to which incorporates social circumstances, the foundation in which he was grown up, his instruction, his family foundation and so forth. This has not been clarified by the Natural Law Theory. Further, the trouble is …show more content…
Fundamental rights being the natural rights or the most essential rights for human existence like freedom of speech and expression and many other rights being curtailed. Thus sometimes the theory of natural law is being denied as for the wellbeing of the society. Other than the above rights even right to life is being the most essential right as natural law is infringed by way of Special power for armed forces(Special power)Act 1958. Which depicts that natural law theories are not excusive but some act should be done against it for the welfare of the