The sanctity of life argument states that all human life is precious. In the case of conjoined twins Mary and Jody, an operation was proposed to separate the twins, but the result would be to save one and hasten the death of the other. The twins' parents were devout Catholics and had decided that they would not hasten the death process of one of their daughters. Instead they chose to forgo the operation even though they knew that both girls would die instead of just one. The doctors assigned to this case appealed to the courts to let them go against the parents' wishes and perform the operation to save Jody's life. The doctors' request was granted and the operation was performed. Mary is dead. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay The sanctity of life argument also prohibits the killing of an innocent, in this case the innocent is Mary. The doctors argued that in this case they were not actually killing Mary, the operation was not intended to kill her, her body was simply not strong enough to support itself. But the doctors, knowing that Mary could not survive the operation, knowingly hastened her death by performing the operation. The question remains whether or not the doctors killed Mary by choosing to go against her parents' wishes and performing the operation and ultimately hastening her death when she and her joint sister could have died a natural death. If one were to challenge the sanctity of life argument, then they would claim that there are three conditions to be posed. The first condition that must be met to provide a reason in challenging the sanctity of life argument is that the innocent human being in question must have no future possibility, which means that the quality of his life has been compromised. All the tasks that we perform daily without thinking about them, these people may not be able to perform them. The kind of life that society has deemed the normal individual should dictate would not be possible for these people, the kind of life that includes going to school, contributing to society through work, getting married, providing society for existence through playback and so on. The second condition that must be met is that the innocent human being has no desire to continue living (perhaps it is that he has no desire at all). This would happen if the person in question is in a comatose state or other medical state where they are no longer able to make decisions for themselves. The third and final condition to be satisfied is that killing the individual saves the lives of others who will be able to continue to lead full lives. The third condition is the one related to Jody and Mary's case because in order for Jody to move on and lead a full life, Mary would have to be killed. Because she would never be able to move forward and lead a full life, her death was justified. Socrates begins by asking, “Is conduct right because the gods command it, or do the gods command it because it is right?” The second part of your question is: “does this conception of morality make God's commands arbitrary?” Divine Command theory states that God decrees what is right and what is wrong. The actions that God commands us to perform are morally required; the actions that God forbids us to do are morally wrong. But are these commands subjective? How can we truly know which actions God would consider morally wrong and morally right? Socrates' second concept attempts to explain this by comparing God to a commanding parent. Instead of offering a reason as to why.