Morality, Ethics and Dilemmas - Assignment Example

Morality, Ethics and Dilemmas College Morality, Ethics and Dilemmas One major similarity between all religions is adherence to the concepts and tenets of the natural moral law. As Pollock (2008) explains, in ethics, the natural law explains there are universally accepted sets of rights and wrongs, all of which are similar across religious affiliations. In other words, morality is taken as the order of the universe and is expected from any being despite their cultural or religious orientations. This could imply that universal moral laws do exist without any relations to supernatural beings. The universal moral law stresses that what is good is what is natural and that which is natural is good (Pollock, 2008). As such, there is a general agreement that whatever is moral has to conform to the natural world based on a number of core moral principles expected from everyone despite their religious affiliations. Pollock quotes the preservation of one being as a natural inclination and a basic moral principle to explain the universality of these moral laws. In other words, one has to preserve their selves and has a duty to ensure the preservation of the entire species of humanity, a prohibition against murder or mistreatment of others. Moreover, considering that humans are social animals, such socialization has to be a natural instinct that calls for generosity and altruism. These are important qualities that underscore morality across religions. The natural laws are further carried forward to political systems to explain the universal moral concept. Any democracy has to observe and respect the freedoms and rights of people as part of their natural rights in the premise that, that which is natural is good and has to be observed, a concept applied across different religions today. Moreover, the ethics of virtue as Pollock further elaborates require that in order to be good, one has to do good. The sole intention, in this case, is to ensure a good end that promotes the universal natural laws. As such, a good act has to lead to eudemonia or happiness. This relates to having a good life, attaining and maintaining moral excellence and attaining ones achievements. This end is same across religious affiliations 2. There are three main basic principles in explaining human behavior morally and ethically. One, only humans have the power to act. In this case, any judgment based on moral behavior has to be directed to the behavior of a human. Consequently, only humans are expected to be moral or immoral mainly based on the capacity of humans to reason, considering that only humans have the capacity to act or be good and make voluntary and rational decisions. Man has been given moral rationality, which allows him to have free will when choosing to act good or bad, a capacity that cannot be found in animals. As such an animal that kills may not considered immoral but man is considered immoral due to this special power of rationality. Free will. Human behavior stems from the human’s ability to have a free will and undertake a free action. In this case, mentally challenged individuals cannot sufficiently discern what is around them so as to make rational decision on what is wrong or bad; they may not possess any degree of moral culpability (Pollock, 2011). Punishing a two-year-old child who has erred is only meant to educate them but not to punish them for acting irrationally. As such, in any criminal justice system, a person committing murder may either receive a death sentence or hospital commitment depending on whether the person is perceived as sane or insane to make a rational decision. The third attribute of human behavior is that the case of such behavior being moral or immoral is only when that behavior affects others. Taking one’s lie is considered immoral in that it hurts those who love us and that it goes against the natural moral laws that life has to be protected and no one has the right to take it away. Generally, any behavior that may affect others directly or indirectly would be judged as moral or immoral. 3. Distributive justice. This is a justice system concerned with the allocation of goods and items of a society to all its respective members. Such rewards in a society may include wealth, healthcare, education or other forms of programs and projects. The fact that some people have more access to goods than others might imply that goods in such a society have not been distributed fairly (Pollock, 2011). A society may have to decide for themselves who to pay taxes, who to take care of the sick and the amount of cash that one has to pay. The challenges involved in deciding between these roles are all concepts of discussion under distributive justice. On the other hand, corrective justice system is concerned more with determining the possibilities and methods of punishment in a society (Pollock, 2011). Similarly, in this case, the offender has to get what they deserve similar to the distribution of goods in distributive justice. However, the reward has to be punishment. In this case, the society has the challenge of deciding the amount of just rewards or punishment for a specific crime and time. 4. The police constantly face numerous ethical dilemmas when exercising their powers of discretion. These dilemmas are part of their daily job and are in most cases unavoidable, may not be popular with some groups and in most cases are not academic (Pollock, 2011). Most of these dilemmas are directly linked to their duties making, which further complicates the problem. Discrimination. The police have to apply discretion in their duties despite coming from diverse cultural and social backgrounds. Therefore, there might be possibilities where social, cultural or even religious inclinations may lead to prejudiced decisions when dealing with, for instance, minority groups such as homosexuals, women, and different races, among others. When the police are prejudiced against any of these groups, such a group would not receive the same protection as other citizens. Moreover, some policemen, due to their backgrounds, may show open biases towards some of the above-mentioned groups. For instance in U.S today, the blacks have been demonstrating accusing the police of biases and discriminating the black youths. Though the police may not actually mean to prejudice such groups in the community, the specialty of their roles amplifies any action when dealing with such groups. However, in some cases, such biases might be a matter of perception from the affected community. In reactive investigations, the police face a wide range of ethical dilemmas. For instance, when the police attempt to reconstruct a reported crime, which would involve collecting and gathering evidence to identify and book the offender, they might be biased, which could impair their decision-making abilities. Such impairment could involve an attempt to be involved in noble cause corruption. Such corruption could involve an attempt to cancel or ignore any evidence that does not conform to their set of beliefs, among others. Moreover, the police could be tempted to alter or produce biased evidence that would support their line of the story in addition to overstressing the available evidence. For instance, cases of deception among the police have been reported to increase, which may alter investigations resulting in unfairness to the involved parties. The result would be deviant lies and a set of false testimonies in court to support a fabricated case or cover up any ills the police may have committed. The use of force by police also presents another ethical dilemma in the police force. Lawful force is reasonable force that could be necessary or legal to meet a certain end. However, use of force is today one of the major humanitarian violations across U.S. The use of force depends on the discretion of the individual police officer. Consequently, any culprit who may question or may fail to recognize the authority of the police could be a victim of such brutal force. The police would again defend such use of force to be a response to the deviant behavior of the suspect. As Pollock (2011) explains, the Los Angeles Police Department has over the time being blamed for tolerating and justifying the use of force in response to the suspect’s offensive behavior. In such cases, the use of force is discretional and has been abused unethically by the same police force. 5. Some of the forms of police misconduct that Pollock (2011) highlights include cases of corrupt officers, a major misconduct revealed in the 1973 Knapp Commission. The commission identified two main types of corrupt police officers namely: meat eaters and grass eaters. Meat eaters had a tendency of asking for free meals and soliciting bribes from the public. The police also favored assignments in units designated to deal with gambling, prostitution and narcotics, two lucrative areas where the police solicited money. On the other hand, grass eaters just took free meals and any bribes given to them. The solution to this would be making it a crime for any persons to offer a bribe or the police to take a bribe. Moreover, police units dealing with such sensitive crimes have to be constantly observed and investigated to detect cases of malpractices. Moreover, another commission, the Mollen Commission was formed in 1992 to investigate cases of police misconduct unearthed other cases of police corruption in NYPD. The corrupt cases ranged from stealing of narcotics and money from people dealing in drugs and offering protection to the drug barons. The commission also unearthed cases of burglary rings involving a few police officers within the NYPD in addition to dealing in narcotics. The solution to this problem is eliminating drug dealers from the society and educating the police on the hazards of such drugs. The public also has to be sensitized to detect and report any cases of cooperation between drug dealers and the police. 6. Crime fighters and public servants have different roles that differentiate them. For instance, a crime fighter in most cases has an enemy in the name of a criminal. Cognizant of this, the crime fighters prepare to use any possible method to fight the enemy, which in some cases justifies the use of lethal force. Considering that the crime fighter is directly involved in the war, they have the privilege of making and implementing their decisions, which could partly justify the use of excessive force. This view of the police as an army against some people in the society presents a combative and reactive police force, which may instill fear among the people. However, perceiving the police as public servants presents a better proactive and gentle approach towards fighting crime. In this perspective, the police view criminals like any other good citizen but whose behavior needs correction. As such, the police do have the mandate to serve all people including the criminals themselves, considering that they are part of the society. Consequently, the police will make limited use of force. As such, the police as a public service force present a more humane image that serves all in the society and which is people friendly, unlike the brutal crime fighters image. References Pollock J. (2011) Ethical Dilemmas and Decisions in Criminal Justice. CA: Cengage Learning Read More