Sentences with phrase «questions of moral judgment»

Not exact matches

How does he feel entitled to make any claim to be a better Catholic than Santorum (for that is what he's implicitly claiming) on questions that the church rightly leaves to the prudential judgment of voters and public officials, within broad boundaries, when in the next breath he confesses his complete failure to be any kind of Catholic at all on a question on which the church speaks with categorical moral authority?

My ultimate standard of moral judgment is found when I face the questions: Does this act bring life or does it bring death to the persons involved?

As I have argued in these pages and elsewhere, the «presumption,» by detaching the just war way of thinking from its proper political context» the right use of sovereign public authority toward the end of tranquillitas ordinis, or peace» tends to invert the structure of classic just war analysis and turn it into a thin casuistry, giving priority consideration to necessarily contingent in bello judgments (proportionality of means, discrimination or noncombatant immunity) over what were always understood to be the prior ad bellum questions («prior» in that, inter alia, we can have a greater degree of moral clarity about them).

It removes the necessity for you to question human morals or to make your own moral decisions, because it lays out a set of simple rules upon which you will always fall back if things get a little too confusing or uncomfortable for independent judgment or consideration.

But more important is the question of what basis there is for distinguishing «false» transcendence from «true» except, as the authors finally do, by reference to the realm of ordinary moral judgment and their own collective and informed insight.

More recently, in 1996 when this journal pointedly addressed judicial usurpation in a way that raised the question of the legitimacy of the political order as it presently functions, Commentary reacted with alarm to the suggestion that all polities and parties are subject to transcendent moral judgment.

Stated formally, we may put the question this way: On what grounds are we to base our judgments of value and thus our moral, social and political decision - making?

If the norm of the new humanity in Jesus Christ obliges us to question the Apostle's opinions about the proper status of women and the institution of human slavery, so also that norm obliges us to scrutinize each of his moral judgments regarding its Christian faithfulness for our time — including his perception of homosexuality.

But lord chief justice Lord Bingham said: «The democratic process is liable to be subverted if, on a question of moral and political judgment, opponents of the act achieve through the courts what they could not achieve in parliament.»

Because much of our moral and legal system is based on protecting conscious entities, we need to answer the question of who is conscious to make responsible judgments.

He took the trolley problem as his starting point, then invented questions designed to place volunteers on a spectrum of moral judgment.

And even in self - publishing, you have the ominous question of whether it's «vanity» or not (another moral judgment, but not one without real consequential meaning for those who are genuinely taken to the cleaners by bad actors).