New Book: Peter Singer & Christian Ethics

18 04 2012

Peter Singer and Christian EthicsThe first book to emerge from last year’s McDonald Centre conference on Peter Singer has just been published by Cambridge University Press.

Available from Amazon UK and Amazon USA.

No living philosopher is most controversial than Peter Singer. In this book, Charlie Camosy, who is currently Visiting Fellow at the McDonald Centre, offers a critical, but constructive reading of Singer’s arguments on animal rights, euthanasia, poverty, and abortion. He finds important and surprising areas of common ground between Singer and Christian ethics, but he also does not hold back in pressing Singer where his views are lacking. The book is a model of the McDonald Centre’s vision that Christians can in public engage generously, rigorously, and candidly, even with views that they do not share.

From the back cover:

Interaction between Peter Singer and Christian ethics, to the extent that it has happened at all, has been unproductive and often antagonistic. Singer sees himself as leading a ‘Copernican Revolution’ against a sanctity of life ethic, while many Christians associate his work with a ‘culture of death.’ Charles Camosy shows that this polarized understanding of the two positions is a mistake. While their conclusions about abortion and euthanasia may differ, there is surprising overlap in Christian and Singerite arguments, and disagreements are interesting and fruitful. Furthermore, it turns out that Christians and Singerites can even make common cause, for instance in matters such as global poverty and the dignity of non-human animals. Peter Singer and Christian ethics are far closer than almost anyone has imagined, and this book is valuable to those who are interested in fresh thinking about the relationship between religious and secular ethics.

More information is available from Cambridge University Press and Facebook. Camosy is a regular contributor to the blog, Catholic Moral Theology.





Making Medical Killing Legal

16 01 2012

Earlier this month, Lord Falconer’s Commission for Assisted Dying released a 400-page report advocating the legalization of assisted suicide in a narrow range of situations.  The report was commissioned by the campaign group Dignity in Dying. It describes the current law on assisted dying as “inadequate and incoherent” and offers a legal framework that would permit only those who had been diagnosed with less than a year to live to seek an assisted suicide, and then only if they met strict eligibility criteria. In the latest Parliamentary Brief, John Perry defends the law as it currently stands. He concludes:

The present system preserves both the integrity of the medical profession and the general prohibition of killing, but at the same time makes room for rare exceptions via the prosecutor’s discretion. That’s messy, imperfect—and probably just about right.

The Falconer Report was funded by the author Terry Pratchett. In the latest issue of Triple Helix, Dr Richard Hain offers this thoughtful review of Pratchett’s much-discussed BBC documentary, Choosing to Die.





New Book: Perry’s Pretenses of Loyalty

6 10 2011

John Perry’s book, The Pretenses of Loyalty, was published this summer by Oxford University Press. It is now available from Amazon USA and Amazon UK.

The book was recently featured by the journal Political Theology.

Reviews

“This elegant and tightly-reasoned tract offers a striking new reading of John Locke’s theories of church and state, religion and politics, conscience and command. Though Locke is often seen solely as a secular prophet of modern liberalism, Perry shows that he is also a subtle political theologian who saw the need to harmonize our spiritual and temporal loyalties in public and private life. If Perry is right on Locke, our conventional constitutional histories and political theories will need ample revision, and Perry shows us the way.”—John Witte, Center for the Study of Law & Religion, Emory University

“Have you ever wondered whether it’s possible for a liberal democratic state to accommodate all the diverse loyalties of its citizens, especially all their diverse religious  Read the rest of this entry »





Biggar & Singer Debate in Standpoint

7 07 2011

Following the recent conference, Standpoint magazine convened a dialogue between Peter Singer and Nigel Biggar. Hosted by Standpoint editor, Daniel Johnson, the conversation spans a variety of topics, including the value of human and animal life, the morality of killing, abortion, infanticide, euthanasia, and others.

Standpoint: We have just been attending a conference in Oxford entitled Christian Ethics Engages Peter Singer. Perhaps we should kick off with a question that you, Nigel, asked at the end of the conference. On what grounds, Peter, would you give greater weight to the interests, the preferences, theneeds of the Jewish victims in the Holocaust, rather than the Nazi perpetrators? …  Read the debate in full.





Mixing Religion & Politics

10 05 2011

Parliamentary BriefIn the new May issue of Parliamentary Brief, John Perry reflects on what’s right, and wrong, with the ‘secular agenda’. Perry describes the three most common objections to using religious arguments in public, and shows them to be misplaced. Read the full article.

Parliamentary Brief is a monthly magazine published chiefly for members of the House of Commons, House of Lords, senior civil servants, and political journalists. It provides in-depth analysis on a range of domestic and international issues.





Can Britain Give Up God?

15 03 2011

Read Nigel Biggar’s recent article in Parliamentary Brief, The ‘Secular Country’ that can’t give up God.” Parliamentary Brief is a monthly magazine published chiefly for members of the House of Commons, House of Lords, senior civil servants, and political journalists. It provides in-depth analysis on a range of domestic and international issues.





What Makes Torture Wrong?

6 12 2010

The Financial Times magazine has recently been exploring the morality, and the alleged effectiveness, of torture in cases where it would seem to save lives. John Lloyd, a Financial Times editor who has worked with the McDonald Centre on ethics and the media, wrote the initial article. Nigel Biggar’s response is now generating comments in the magazine’s Letters to the Editor.








Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.