any times, by the religion we adhere to. If this is true, then our fundamental religious beliefs can help identify if in fact our society holds the duty to rescue to be a moral duty.The United States is a "Christian" nation. Its population is predominantly of Christian belief. Accordingly, an examination of Judeo-Christian morality would help illustrate whether or not we value the duty rescue as value at all.In Judaism, the duty of a bystander to rescue another in peril is not only a religious duty but it is an ethical and legal one as well. A citizen must be prepared not only to give physical aid to a person in peril but also is required to provide financial support as well. Failure to provide such aid is not punished by incarceration but holds legal significance in that the rescuer is entitled to financial restitution resulting from his rescue and his immunity from liability. Considering that a duty to rescue is implicitly rewarded and explicitly protected would support the notion that yes Judaism does value the duty to rescue as a moral. Accordingly, a nation indebted with a Judeo-Christian religious background would value a duty to rescue as a moral as well.The same case could be made for the teachings of modern Christianity, most notably the parable of the Good Samaritan. (Insert parable here)V.Psychological /Sociological AspectsIn order to come to a viable understanding of the practical implications of passing a duty to rescue statute one must consider the psychological aspects. Psychology would play a vital role in the viability of a statute requiring a citizen to undertake a duty to rescue a person in peril. In its simplest form, the science of psychology undertakes to expose patterns of human behavior that occur in certain situations. Accordingly, psychologists have proposed several theories regarding why people chose to help person's in peril or not.One theory supposes that all human actions are motivated by self-in...
