JS discussion 1 When looking at the relationship between personal and social pri

JS discussion 1 When looking at the relationship between personal and social principles similarities can be seen, however there are also many differences. According to Panicola (2011) ethics aims to ask and answer two questions: “Who ought we to become as persons?” and “How ought we to become as persons?” When looking at the basis of these questions it can be seen how a person’s personal principles could differ from those of society because the normative basis changes for everyone. Our normative basis is shaped by experiences, values, family and community, and faith (Penn). If we did not have a normative basis, we would not be able to determine the virtues we should develop, the principles to apply, or the consequences that are appropriate (Panicola, 2011). Our personal principles are therefore established based on our normative basis. Social principles are established based on the common good for the public. The themes from the Catholic Social Teachings can be used as the basis for social principles. These principles are a guide to how we should treat one another in our relationships and communities (Penn). Social principles are an overarching theme versus personal principles, which are more specific and may be more situational based. The principles that I find having the potential to be most useful for thinking about bioethical issues include the following Catholic Social Teachings: the life and dignity of the human person, solidarity, the option for the poor and vulnerable (GATCO). Each of the social teachings has the potential to be useful for bioethical issues, however these three stand out to me the most. These principles have to do with treating each other with dignity, protecting human life, having a sense of community regardless of differences, and protecting at risk populations. When reading Body Politics (Lysaught) it made me realize just how important these principles are. The reading opens with showing how poverty can affect an area and how there is a great disparity between the wealthy and the poor. These disparities should not be seen related to money; we should not have these disparities at all. There is one quote that really resonated with me, “rather than merely stating an opposition to abortion and euthanasia, open your church and your homes to the pregnant teen, the intellectually disabled, the terminally ill” (Lysaught). I feel as though this quote does a great job of summing up why the three Catholic Social Teachings, I chose could be useful for bioethics. It shows that we need to protect each other, help each other in solidarity, and help those that are at risk of being overlooked. The principles that I find hard to see as helpful are the Catholic Social Teachings of the call to family, community and participation, and the care for God’s creation. I feel as though these teachings are valuable, however they may not necessarily benefit bioethics. If we say that everyone has a right to form a family or organize a community, then are we not also saying that people with bad intentions have these rights as well? Couldn’t this lead to more evil than good? I also struggle to see how the care for God’s creation plays a role in bioethics. If we are following all the other teachings, then are we not in turn following this principle already? It is possible to use theological principles to engage in bioethical discussion within a pluralistic society because they do not have to correlate directly to religion. The theological principles can be said in varying ways that others could then apply to their life without feeling a pressure from a particular religion. As Cahill states, “theological bioethics must critically reflect on, make normative judgments about, theoretically account for, and ultimately take part in a global social network of mobilization for change.” These principles in turn can be portrayed to showcase a morally desirable and possible way of living. ML Discussion 2 Viewing the relationship between personal and social principle, I was able to comprehend that the two aspects of our being and doings are essential (Panicola, 2011). The basic principle for both social and personal should include the good wellness of the whole community around us. The importance of human relationship is to inherent the worth of an individual, human relationship, and decency for human flourishing. Principals that have potential of being useful for bioethical issues are life and dignity, rights and responsibilities and solidarity. These specific principles are human flourishing and have basic rules on how to treat one another. For short, without the connection of human beings there would no flourishing humans. It is also be an implication when it comes to making decision to consider the greater good. Panicola states, “From an ethical perspective we cannot love God and flourish as human beings without loving our neighbor as we love ourselves” (Panicola 2011). Principles that are hard to see as helpful are equitable distribution, beneficence, and stewardship. These specific principles are almost hard for some of our society to follow or go along with. Society can use theological principles to engage in bioethical discussions in a pluralistic society by applying for example our rights and responsibilities. Our pluralistic society can be challenging due to different faiths but we must remember, everyone has the right to make their own decisions while protecting the greater good. Theological principles are possible to engage with bioethical discussions by having rationality principles.