Introduction
The theory of natural law can be attributed to philosophers such as Thomas Aquinas and Aristotle. Aquinas, known as the Doctor of the Church was granted sainthood by the Catholic church. His theory of natural rights has many implications that justifies the existence of God’s creations and the moral code inherent in man to choose between good and evil. His theory has typically been associated with metaphysics and religion, but the philosopher Emmanuel Kant’s exploration of ethics strengthens Aquinas’ view, potentially avoiding an argument of ethics based on deity. Thus, allowing Christian’s more credence for accepting natural law as an objective approach to ethics. Furthermore, natural law theory has its roots in classical liberal philosophy and in modern times has been come to known as libertarianism. The basic premise of this philosophy claims that the most moral way to structure society is through maximizing voluntary transactions and minimizing state coercion through scrupulous application of the non-aggression principle (NAP). This principle states that the initiation of force on an individual and state level is immoral and unjustified. Through comparing the non-aggression principle to Kantian and Thomistic natural law-it becomes apparent that the classical Christian theory of natural law as a system of ethics is most compatible with libertarianism.
Other Political Philosophies
To claim that libertarianism is most compatible with Christianity, it is necessary to define other prevalent political philosophies.
Progressivism-A post-modernist school of thought that adopts equality as a moral goal. Conservativism-Seeks to preserve cultural and traditional aspects of the past.
Fascism-Private property and corporations exist to serve the government, a system that can rightfully be called capitalistic cronyism coupled with nationalism.
Communism-Common ownership of all goods. Classes and hierarchies are oppressive and abolition of these will lead to the most moral form of society.
Deontological Libertarianism-The initiation of force is immoral and market and voluntary forces are the most efficient and moral way to structure society.
From the preceding paragraphs, one will see how an acceptance of natural law is inherently more compatible with libertarianism.
Thomistic Natural Law
The NAP as defined above is most compatible with Aquinas’ theory of natural law. “good is to be done and pursued, and evil is to be avoided” (Summa Theologica). Aquinas claims that in a state of nature one is inclined not to kill, not to steal, etc. and that these laws are brought forth not by state decree, but by man’s reason. Essentially claiming that innate in humankind is the ability to choose between good and evil. Humans conclude to not perform acts of immorality through reasoning the ramifications of their choices. The immediate response to danger is to escape it and expend the necessary resources to preserve one’s life. Through this empirical observation, one can see that the life of another would be upheld in the same importance. The natural law if obeyed, allows for humans to act in accordance with God’s eternal laws. The NAP similarly claims that one should not do unto another as they would not like done unto themselves (often called the silver or negative golden rule). The rights of an individual to pursue their own goals is innate. The right to preserve life i.e. self-defense, speak, believe, eat/ingest, consent, etc. cannot be interfered with by an external force, unless their actions in doing so directly encroaches on the rights of another. Besides prohibiting the impedance of another to exercise their natural rights, the NAP does not instruct an individual on how to live their life. Aquinas’ theory of natural law is similar in that he deduces actions that would directly violate natural law as immoral. Across many cultures in history, the ethics of thou shalt not kill and thou shalt not steal have been the basis of society. One can see how the framework of natural law establishing what one should not do is rooted in the same principle as the axiom of non-aggression. Weaknesses attributed to these arguments have commonly claimed that natural law purports that the existence of God is necessary, and the NAP is similarly rooted in this metaphysical principle. An exploration of categorical imperatives will show why this is not necessarily true.
Kant’s Categorical Imperatives
Kant’s categorical imperatives states: “Act only according to that maxim whereby you can, at the same time, will that it should become a universal law.” (Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals). Essentially there are absolute rules and laws that must be applied universally, and exceptions cannot be carved out. One can see that this is like natural law theory but does not start with the premise of morality deriving from God. One will not be inclined to steal from another to buy a product, because if that maxim was applied universally then others would continually steal from one and it would not be possible for one to obtain their end goal of possessing the product. Due to the absolutist nature of Kant’s theory, problematic scenarios can be deduced from an application of his categorical imperatives, but it can be seen how it attempts to justify the existence of morals and ethics without the existence of God. Whether Aquinas intended natural law theory to depend on the existence of God, one can see that Kant’s theory adds an objective measure for how a Christian could justify the existence of morality to a religious and non-religious individual. In comparison with the NAP, one can see that application of this principle on a state level implicates that corporate welfare, farm subsidies, cronyism, bail-outs, and many other laws carve out exceptions. A proponent of natural law/categorical imperatives would rightfully reject these forms of legislation based on its immorality.
As explored above, morality is not based on an equal society, the preserving of tradition, or the interests of a nation state. Although these things are not inherently immoral, these political philosophies both in theory and in practice have been replete of the initiation of coercion to obtain their political goals. Christians would rightfully use Kant’s theory coupled with Aquinas’ in discussing the merits of a compatible political philosophy. This is especially true in modern society where a nation state has typically been separated from religion and society is diverse with many beliefs. Thus, the inclusion of Kant’s theory further strengthens the acceptance of natural law as a theory that can justify the existence of morals/ethics to the atheists and the believer of God. The classical Christian model of theology traces much of its philosophy back to the work of Aquinas and his logical deductions on the existence of God and morality. Because of the Christian acceptance of natural law, it is only reasonable to conclude from the preceding comparison with the NAP that libertarianism is the most compatible political philosophy with Christianity.
