Apply natural law ethics to any ONE of the following: euthanasia, non-generative sex, barrier birth control, lying.

Euthanasia - The individual right to die with dignity, a subtle form of social consent to depart, the need to be justifiably permitted to cease living. Quality of life over longevity and continuum of it etc. Coercion to cease enforced by whatever means by peers family society. Mental depression instability or imbalance leading to a sudden pathos inciting euthanasia urges. The human right to die with dignity, human responsibility to depart if faculties cease to function correctly. The natural order where life ceases irrespective and without medicine and surgery to prolong pain and suffering. Quality of life and living rather than mere existence for the sake of living.

Non generative copulation - cultural differences determine views, though all views have some credence and reasoning. More evolved societies liberated from the traditional view though differing cultures fare terribly when the basic more is overturned. Licentiousness, permissiveness, perversity are all dilemmas of certain societies corrupted by such a clue, whereas the european norm tends in that main not to be.

Barrier birth control. with reference and in relation to the aforementioned, where liberalism in such matters is prevalent them birth control is naturally an imperative. Each life must be a created one by both parties contributing to its formation. Where recreational acts lead to the creation of the unplanned, then control is essential.

Lying is being untruthful, deceitful, misleading and dishonesty. It is preferable to be silent or observe the right to silence each has in this nation, and each is warned by law in this society to remain silent than incriminate themselves in any way. To the self be true. If one struggles to be true to oneself how then can one be expected t be truthful generally. the law of this land accepts this and each has the right to remain silent, and when speaking, to speak the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, This is a fundamental right of this civilised society.

Euthanasia is my favoured topic inasmuch as if one feels life is overwhelmingly difficult, mental difficulties arise, and the spirit yearns and call of release then society must permit the mind to depart from its maddened plight, psychosis, mental disturbance and incriminating circumstance. It is a basic right of this british civilised society and a fundamental law.

I firmly support Euthanasia as keeping people alive purely for the benefit and profit of others is unethical inhuman and cruel. Hence the most highest societies in Europe have this lawful privilege. With reference to the art of dying well ...

she fails to realize that natural law IS eternal.

Aquinas was a theist, of course - so his concepts of law ultimately rested upon God as a foundation. God's thought pattern and concept of the universe he created were therefore Aquinas' "eternal law".

But Man, and all other creatures, almost always operate without any understanding of God's mind. So they operate according to "natural law" which Aquinas only briefly outlines. In essence, natural law requires each beast to do "what is good for it". That is, to take the choice that seems most likely to result in its survival, its contentment, and its success, etc. In other words, by doing what is "good for us", we comply with natural law. While Aquinas did not elaborate on the bases upon which each beast might evaluate or "sense" the natural law, others have done so. For a "feel" for natural law ethics, it's best to turn to better-elaborated models of "what's 'good' for us" than Aquinas got around to thinking about.

You can look at Abraham Maslow for one fairly detailed model for elaborating "natural law", as Aquinas would have called it. Maslow has explained a range of considerations which drive creature's choices under natural law. Those might help you in considering your four cases.

God's law is eternal

..nature law..survival of the fittest.