Deeply rooted in the Bible, natural law theory often influences actual legal affairs involving religion. An example can be found in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores in 2014, where the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that for-profit companies are not required by law to provide health insurance to employees that covers the cost of services that violate their religious beliefs. In contrast to the multitude of Hobbes` laws, Cumberland states in the very first sentence of his treatise on the laws of nature that „all the laws of nature are reduced to one, benevolence towards all rationals.“ [108] He later clarified, „By the name of rational, I ask permission to understand God and man; and I do so under the authority of Cicero. Cumberland argues that the mature development („perfection“) of human nature involves individual human will and action for the common good. [109] For Cumberland, human interdependence excludes the natural Hobbes right of each individual to wage war on all others in order to survive personally. In fact, Finnis` theory of natural law seems compatible with the historical opponent of naturalism, legal positivism, insofar as Finnis` view is compatible with a source-based theory of legal validity; Laws that are technically valid but unfair because of the source do not fully bind the citizen, according to Finnis. In fact, Finnis (1996) believes that the classical naturalism of Thomas Aquinas fully confirms the notion that human laws are „postulated“. Nevertheless, Fuller`s conceptual naturalism is fundamentally different from that of classical naturalism. First, Fuller rejects the classical naturalistic view that there are necessary moral constraints on the content of law, and instead notes that there are necessary moral constraints on the procedural mechanisms by which law is created and administered: „What I have called the inner morality of law is… a procedural version of natural law.
[in the sense] that it is not a question of the substantive objectives of legislation, but of how a system of rules governing human behavior must be constructed and administered if it is to be effective while remaining what it claims to be“ (Fuller 1964, 96-97). As Thomas Hobbes used in his treatises Leviathan and De Cive, natural law is „a commandment or general rule discovered by reason, by which a man is forbidden to do that which destroys his life, or deprives him of the means of preserving it; And to leave aside what he believes can best be preserved. [95] Natural law as a protection of social practices and norms applies not only to states and governments, but also to individuals. It provides an ethical framework for controlling individuals in their interactions with each other, based on the idea that positive or man-made laws are merely the articulation of pre-existing norms, social practices, and ideas held by natural law. Although natural law guides the individual in his aspirations and relationships, it does not lead to universal agreement. In addition, people do not always act on the basis of rational and deductive thought. The law of nature includes, first, some of the most general commandments known to all; and, secondly, certain secondary and more detailed rules, which are, so to speak, conclusions that flow closely from the first principles. As far as these general principles are concerned, the natural law can now be abstractly extinguished from the hearts of men. However, it is extinguished in the case of a particular action, insofar as reason is prevented from applying the general principle to a particular point of practice, because of desire or another passion, as indicated above (77, 2). But as with the others, that is, the secondary commandments, the natural law can be erased from the human heart, either by bad persuasion, just as in speculative matters errors arise with regard to the necessary conclusions; or by evil customs and corrupt habits, as in some people, theft and even unnatural vices, as the apostle (Rm.
i) says, were not considered sins. [55] This right includes the freedom to lead a peaceful life, to accumulate wealth and property, and to otherwise satisfy personal needs and desires consistent with the continuing freedoms of others. Anyone who deprives another person of his or her rights to the state of nature violates the principle of equality. In the end, Locke writes, the state of nature turns out to be unsatisfactory. Human freedom is neither equally respected nor protected. Because individuals have the freedom to set the boundaries of their own personal needs and desires in the state of nature, greed, narcissism and self-interest eventually rise to the surface, causing irrational and excessive behavior and endangering human security. Locke concluded that natural law leads people to establish a government empowered to protect life, liberty, and property.