You try to live strictly by the moral rules contained in your religion’s moral code. The two most important rules are “Be merciful” (don’t give people what they deserve) and “Be just” (give people exactly what they deserve). Now suppose a man is arrested for stealing food from your house, and the police leave it up to you whether he should be prosecuted for his crime or set free. Should you be merciful and set him free, or be just and make sure he is appropriately punished? How do you resolve this conflict of rules? Can your moral code resolve it? To what moral principles or theories do you appeal? Needs to be answered using course textbook, doing ethics Inquisitive by Lewis Vaughn
Requirements: 350 words -400 words
Religious moral codes act as principles that guide believers’ decision-making when faced with ethical dilemmas or merely in their day-to-day activities. However, moral contradictions are inevitable when conflict emerges due to dilemmas prevalent in the present situation (Vaughn, 2018). In the given scenario, a man breaks into my house and steals food, and the police officers would require me to decide how to handle the man. As a believer, there are two essential rules to follow: being merciful and having the man set free or being just, meaning ensuring the man gets punished for stealing. Although I am aware that certain circumstances push people to steal, I would apply the moral code of being just and let the offender realize their action was inappropriate.