Theme B — Religion and Life

Topic TB1 — Origins of the Universe: Religion vs Science

The question of how the universe began sits at the intersection of scientific discovery and religious belief. The prevailing scientific theory is the Big Bang theory, which posits that the universe began approximately 13.8 billion years ago from an extremely hot, dense singularity and has been expanding and cooling ever since. This is supported by evidence including the cosmic microwave background radiation and the redshift of distant galaxies. For many, the Big Bang is understood as a purely naturalistic event requiring no divine cause.

Religious responses are varied. At one end, fundamentalist or creationist Christians interpret Genesis literally, believing God created the world in six 24-hour days approximately 6,000 years ago, rejecting the Big Bang. Theistic evolution — accepted by the Catholic Church — holds that God is the primary cause who set the natural processes of the Big Bang and evolution in motion. Liberal thinkers view the Genesis stories as theological truths expressed in the language of the ancient Near East, not a scientific textbook. From this standpoint, religion addresses the "why" (purpose, meaning) while science addresses the "how" (mechanism). Non-religious views typically argue that the universe requires no supernatural explanation and can be fully accounted for by natural physical processes. In exam answers, students must demonstrate awareness of this entire spectrum of responses.

Topic TB2 — Environmental Ethics: Stewardship, Dominion & Pollution

Environmental ethics has become urgent for religious traditions. Central is the concept of stewardship — in Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, the belief that God created the Earth means humans are its caretakers, not its owners. The Earth belongs to God (Psalm 24:1), and humans are entrusted with its care. The Islamic concept of khalifa (vicegerency) sees humans as God's representatives on Earth, responsible for maintaining the balance of creation (mizan). The concept of dominion in Genesis 1:28 ("fill the earth and subdue it") has been interpreted both as responsible stewardship (the modern theological view) and historically as a mandate to exploit nature. Modern theologians strongly argue that "dominion" in the biblical context means responsible kingship — nurturing and caring, not exploiting.

The problem of pollution and environmental degradation is framed by many religious thinkers as a moral and spiritual crisis — a sin against the Creator and a betrayal of the duty to care for the "garden." Religious organisations have responded: in 2015, Islamic scholars issued the Islamic Declaration on Global Climate Change. Pope Francis wrote Laudato Si' (2015), a Catholic encyclical on care for the environment. Christian Aid and Tearfund campaign against environmental injustices. Hindu projects resonate with ahimsa (non-violence), extending respect to all living creatures and the natural world. In exam answers, name specific organisations and documents to demonstrate real knowledge.

Topic TB3 — Animal Rights: Experimentation & Use for Food

Religious views on animal experimentation are generally qualified. Most major religions permit the use of animals for medical research if it reduces human suffering, based on the principle that human life holds a special status (Imago Dei; humans possess a soul). However, there is a strong emphasis on minimising suffering. Buddhist and Hindu traditions, drawing on ahimsa (non-violence extending to all sentient beings), are more strongly opposed to animal harm. The Dalai Lama has expressed concern for animals in laboratories even while acknowledging potential medical benefits.

Regarding the use of animals for food, Islam mandates Halal slaughter — the animal must be killed swiftly by cutting the jugular vein while invoking the name of God, minimising suffering. Judaism mandates Kosher slaughter (shechita) — similarly swift and precise, reflecting the theological concern that even in killing for food, the creature must be treated with respect. Buddhism and Hinduism strongly encourage vegetarianism on the grounds of ahimsa — killing animals for food creates bad karma and is inconsistent with the path of compassion. In Hinduism, the cow is sacred and its protection a religious duty. Christianity generally permits the eating of meat (Acts 10:9–16) but some Christians choose vegetarianism for ethical and environmental reasons. Non-religious utilitarian arguments evaluate animal use based on whether the animal's suffering is outweighed by human benefit.

Topic TB4 — Sanctity of Life & Quality of Life

The sanctity of life is the belief that all human life is inherently holy, sacred, and valuable regardless of the individual's condition. In Christianity, it is grounded in the Genesis creation account: humans are made in the image of God (Imago Dei — Genesis 1:27), giving every person an inviolable dignity. The Qur'an 5:32 states that killing one innocent person is as if one has killed all of humanity. For Sikhs, human life is a rare and precious opportunity to attain union with God. This view implies that human life should be protected from conception to natural death, and that no one has the moral right to extinguish it — including oneself.

The quality of life perspective, by contrast, suggests that the moral value of life is not unconditional but depends on the individual's ability to experience meaning, pleasure, and dignity. From this viewpoint, prolonging a life of unbearable and incurable suffering may not be truly compassionate. Non-religious and humanist frameworks often lean more heavily on quality of life considerations, emphasising personal autonomy and the right to die with dignity. The tension between these two principles is the central battleground of modern bioethics — in every exam question about abortion or euthanasia, both principles must be addressed.

Topic TB5 — Abortion

Abortion — the deliberate ending of a pregnancy — is one of the most contentious subjects in modern ethics. In the UK, abortion is legal up to 24 weeks under the 1967 Abortion Act, and later if there is severe foetal abnormality or risk to the mother's life. The central religious and ethical debate revolves around the moral status of the foetus and the rights of the pregnant woman. The sanctity of life position, held most firmly by the Roman Catholic Church, asserts that life begins at conception — from the moment of fertilisation, a unique human being with a right to life is created. Therefore, abortion is always gravely wrong, even in cases of rape or incest.

The Church of England takes a more nuanced position, acknowledging the foetus has value but recognising extreme circumstances where abortion may be "the lesser of two evils." In Islam, many scholars teach that the foetus receives its soul (ensoulment) at around 40, 80, or 120 days. Before ensoulment, abortion may be permitted by some scholars, especially if the mother's life is in danger. Judaism prioritises the mother's life through Pikuach Nefesh — if the pregnancy endangers the mother, abortion is not only permitted but required. Buddhism, rooted in ahimsa, is generally against taking life, but compassion may lead some Buddhists to support a woman's right to choose in cases of severe suffering. Arguments for the pro-choice position appeal to the woman's fundamental right to bodily autonomy and the quality of life for an unwanted child.

Topic TB6 — Euthanasia

Euthanasia (from the Greek "good death") refers to the deliberate ending of a person's life to relieve suffering. Key distinctions: Voluntary euthanasia (at the patient's request); Non-voluntary (patient cannot consent, e.g. in a persistent vegetative state); Active euthanasia (a deliberate act, e.g. lethal injection); Passive euthanasia (withdrawing treatment, allowing natural death). Physician-assisted suicide is where a doctor provides the means for the patient to end their own life. In the UK, all forms of euthanasia remain illegal, though the debate continues.

The Catholic Church is firmly opposed to all forms of euthanasia and assisted suicide, teaching that life is a gift from God and only God has the right to give and take life. The Church advocates for the development of hospice care and palliative medicine to manage pain and provide dignity. Since 2018, the Catechism states that the death penalty is "inadmissible" — and the same logic extends to euthanasia. Islam holds a similarly firm view: life belongs to Allah and humans must not interfere with the natural time of death (Surah 4:29). Arguments in favour centre on quality of life and personal autonomy — a person facing an inevitable, painful death should have the right to choose a dignified end. Humanists assert that a dignified death is a fundamental human right. In Buddhism, while causing death creates bad karma, the primary value is compassion — which may lead some to support a merciful end to unbearable suffering.

Frequently Asked Questions