changes to law and social attitudes + compatibility w religious approaches

removes any possibility of guaranteeing human rights + makes it hard to use SE in politics/ court cases e.g

• in the 1980s many countries boycotted products from the apartheid regime in south Africa because of the unjust way it treated the black population -- where would SE stand on this?

• Does agape demand that you buy south African oranges in order to make sure poor black farmers get paid? o

• r should you boycott the products and bring down an evil regime, even if that means poverty for the farm workers?
  
  ^^ nat moral law with its emphasize on human rights or utilitarianism with its focus on maximizing happiness might help settle this dilemma, but SE doesn't have a clear answer

influence on marriage laws

• Before DIVORCE REFORM ACT 1940, most people married for life and could only divorce if unfaithful

• Since 1970, couples can get divorces if the marriage is "irretrievably broken down" - this no longer traps people in loveless and abusive marriages

• further changes are coming after the Tini Owens case (2018) where a woman unhappily married for 40 years wanted a divorce without having to wait after 5 years. Her petition failed, but many felt that the law was unfair and the government has promised to bring forward "no fault divorces" so that couples will be able to get divorced without these restrictions

• marriage act of 2013 legalised same sex marriage

laws against hate crimes

the introduction of laws against against 'hate crimes' reflects society's distaste for cruelty and bullying; the laws tries to show compassion and care towards people in need

fletcher + robinson: represents essence of christian thinking

• agapeic ethics represents the very essence of christian thinking and goodness and the heart of Jesus's message about how to live.

• They see themselves as recovering an insight that was lost during centuries of misguided deontological thinking. Agape is the piece of the puzzle that completes christian ethics and makes sense of Jesus's teachings

• e.g St Paul wrote that "love is the fulfillment of the law". → agape and moral laws need each other. Love needs law for its direction, while law needs love for its inspiration

• when someone acts lovingly, there are certain things they will always do and certain things they will never do.

• Deontological rules, like the Ten commandments, could be what Fletcher calls 'crystallization of love': they represent how a loving person will behave most of the time.

• But there are exceptions and agape is the best guide to when these exceptions occur and what should be done when they happen.

religious believers critical of situationalism bc downplays lobing god

• SE claims to be based on the statement "god is love" (I john 4:8) - therefore anything done out of love must please god.

• However, in the next chapter of the new testament, the author says:
  "This is love for God: to keep his commands. And his commands are not burdensome - 1 John 5:3

• fletcher believes that any of Gods commands may be broken if love is the intention.

• This is why he thinks "sex is not always wrong outside marriage, even for Christians"

• However, traditional Christians point out that keeping Gods commands is loving God, this means breaking the command about say, not committing adultery cannot be done out of agape

traditional christians on compatibility

• believe humans are fallen creatures who are sinful by nature (Catholics refer to this as original sin),

• Trying to make agape the basis of our ethical thinking is crediting us with more goodness than we really possess.

• J.A.T Robinson thinks that SE is the only ethical theory for "man come of age", but traditional christian would deny that man has come of age, or will ever come of age, until judgement day arrives.

• Despite all their science and progress, humans in the 21st century are sinful as they've ever been