The Global Scope of Justice

In this paper, I examine the question of the scope of justice, in a not unusual distributive, egalitarian, and universalistic framework. Part I outlines some central features of the egalitarian theory of justice I am proposing. According to such a conception, justice is – at least prima facie – immediately universal, and therefore global. It does not morally recognize any judicial boundaries or limits. Part II examines whether, even from a universalistic perspective, there are moral or pragmatic grounds for rejecting or limiting the global scope of justice. In particular, I scrutinize five universalistic objections: (1) the principle of "moral division of labor"; (2) the connection between cooperation and distributive justice; (3) the primacy of democracy; (4) the dangers of a world state; and (5) political-pragmatic reasons. I intend to show that these objections cannot undermine the strong normative claims of global justice. At the most, political-pragmatic reasons speak in favor of initially striving for somewhat less, in order to receive more general backing.     

Federal Inequality Among Equals: A Contractualist Defense

Federal political orders often exhibit a conflict between the ideals of equality and political autonomy, since individuals in different subunits often enjoy systematically different standards of living conditions. While federal arrangements may be theoretically attractive to avoid despotism, such federal inequality would appear to conflict with the principles of egalitarian cosmopolitanism. The paper argues that individuals' interest in equal shares of income and wealth may legitimately be weighed against their interest in political control enjoyed by their subunit, as long as the inequalities do not engender misery, domination, or unfair procedures. The reasons for subunit autonomy include reducing the risk of domination, increasing the responsiveness to local preferences, and reducing the burdens of decision making. These arguments also suggest that states may not always be the appropriate subunits in legitimate federal orders.     

The Lost Voice: How Libertarianism and Consumerism Obliterate the Need for a Relational Ethics in the National Health Care Service

This article analyzes the contribution Christian ethics mightbe able to make to the ethical debate on policy and caregivingin health and social care in the United Kingdom. The articledeals particularly with the concepts of solidarity and subsidiaritywhich are essential in Christian social ethics and health careethics, and which may be relevant for the ethical debate onhealth and social caregiving in the United Kingdom. An importantargument in the article is that utilitarian and market-drivenpolicies in the National Health Service (NHS) and the socialcare system have marginalized the position of the elderly andhave seriously impoverished the quality of care for the elderly.The neglect of the elderly and other vulnerable groups is alsothe result of widespread consumerist attitudes among patientsand of libertarian models of noninterference which are affirmedby a public ethos of self-sufficiency and counter-dependency.Those who need care dare not make their need known to othersand ask for help, while simultaneously those who could helpare so intimidated by the public affirmation of privacy andnegative rights that they do not dare to offer help except ifthis is explicitly demanded. This distant and standoffish attitudeis in an important way responsible for the fact that the voiceof those in need is altogether lost to the public forum. Christianethics puts much emphasis on responsibility and solidarity withthe needy other but is not able to have much impact on the deliveryof care in a secularized society and health care system likethe NHS. Nonetheless, Christianity still has a powerful andrespected voice, by speaking up for those who cannot speak forthemselves, such as the elderly and the handicapped. Christianscan find allies in the ethics of care and other relational approachesin health care ethics in order to combat libertarianism, consumerism,and utilitarianism.     

Bioethics, theology, and social change

Recent years have witnessed a concern among theological bioethicists that secular debate has grown increasingly "thin," and that "thick" religious traditions and their spokespersons have been correspondingly excluded. This essay disputes that analysis. First, religious and theological voices compete for public attention and effectiveness with the equally "thick" cultural traditions of modern science and market capitalism. The distinctive contribution of religion should be to emphasize social justice in access to the benefits of health care, challenging the for-profit global marketing of research and biotechnology to wealthy consumers. Second, religion and theology have been and are still socially effective in sponsoring activism for practical change, both locally and globally. This claim will be supported with specific examples; with familiar concepts like subsidiarity and "middle axioms"; and with recent analyses of "participatory democracy" and of emerging, decentralized forms of global governance.     

METANOIA AND HEALING: TOWARD A GREAT PLAINS LAND ETHIC

A Great Plains land ethic is shaped by an intimate knowledge of and appreciation for the evolution, ecology, and aesthetics of the plains landscape. The landscape evokes a sense of wonder and mystery suggested by the word "sacrament." The biblical concept of "covenant" points to God as a community-forming power, a creative process that has evolved into the earth community to which we humans belong. In contrast to an anthropocentric ethic which emphasizes human dominion over nature, a Theo-centric land ethic seeks a balance, reflected in Genesis 1–3, between humans who are members of the earth community and moral agents accountable to God for the earth. A land ethic identifies concrete practices of metanoia and healing: agricultural practices to address the loss and degradation of soil; conservation and protection of water sources; utilization of wind and solar energy; and prescribed burning to restore processes vital to the prairie ecosystem. The concept of subsidiarity suggests that practices of metanoia and healing are a combination of wise public policy balanced by personal, family, church, business, and community responsibility.