1.

Peter does not like to miss the only Sunday Mass celebrated in his town, but he feels tired
because of a late party the night before and upon hearing the church bells ringing, remains in
bed. As a result, he fails to fulfill his obligation. Is he responsible for this act of omission?

Yes, because he was aware that there would be a Sunday mass the following morning,
but he still went to a party beforehand. He is the one who is accountable for all of his actions
and decisions. Because the Sunday mass is only held once a week, he might have just gone to
a party later that week. He may have made a one-time sacrifice by not attending the party. He
could spend the rest of the week at a party; it's simply an issue of responsibility. Attending a
Mass is like having a conversation with God. And God provides everything and makes
everything possible, and what I meant was that if it weren't for God, he wouldn't have had the
energy to go to a party or get up the following morning. God woke Peter that morning
because He wanted him to attend mass.

2. Peter writes a good article for the purpose of defending a religious dogma. But he foresees that
some evil-minded persons will misunderstand it and create scandal. Is he morally permitted to
publish the article?

No, because he isn't a member of some sort of journalistic organization. He shouldn't

just write anything comes to mind, especially if it's about religion, because not everyone will
understand.

3. In order to free the city of Manila from the Japanese and put an end to the war in the
Philippines, Gen. MacArthur ordered the bombing of Intramuros, Manila, thus killing many
civilians, and non-combatants. Was the General’s act allowable?

Yes, since it was the only way to liberate Manila from Japanese. And if he does not
carry out those orders, the Philippines will be unable to gain independence.

4. A Boy Scout leaps into the sea to save a companion in danger of being drowned, though he may
lose his life. Is he morally justified to risk his life?

Yes, since he is saving someone of his own free will. It is his decision. Furthermore,
knowing that he saved someone will keep him from feeling guilty.

5. A pregnant and gravely sick woman is advised by a doctor to take certain drugs and medicines.
She knows that these drugs will cause the death of the fetus. May she follow the advice of the
doctor?
 No, there are still many other options for treating a sick person without taking
medications. If she ever decides to follow the doctor's advice, she would end up just like those
killers.

6. Is the killing of a convicted person due to drug trafficking, double murder and child abuse moral
and permissible?

Yes, since the basis is moral law, and he deserved it for what he did. But if it is based
on divine law, it is no longer moral, because only God has the power to take away our lives.
However, because these criminals are endangering society's safety and innocence, I feel that
there is no mistake in expelling one individual rather than ensuring the safety of millions.

7. Francis sees Romy being attacked by a drunken man and realizes that, unless assisted, Romy will
be badly beaten up. He decides, however, not to stop them because he (Francis) enjoys seeing
the fight. Does he sin against charity?

Yes, because it is your responsibility to rescue someone in need. You can't just stand
there and watch them fight as if it's a game to you. The fact that Francis knows Romy makes
him accountable, and it would appear that he is an associate of the attacker, supported by the
fact that he is only drunk. If he's scared that he'll be attacked if he helps, he should at the very
least call the police.

8. A political boss builds a school in a distant barangay in order to get the votes of the people for
an unworthy and corrupt candidate. Is the action of the political boss moral?

No, because if that corrupt politician wins the election, he may instantly shut down
the school since he is corrupt. Unless the political boss is completely unaware that he is
endorsing a corrupt politician, morality may still exist.

9. Both mother and child are in real danger of death during a delivery. In order to save the life of
the mother, the doctor crushes the head of the child directly killing him. May he do so?

No, he should have contacted his family first, particularly the wife's husband, before
performing such a thing. He can't make the decision on his own. However, the choice is not
simple; no doctor wants to lose either a mother or a baby, so he must ask first the family and
decide who to save. It's also against the doctor's code of ethics.
10. In order to avoid disgrace, a pregnant, unmarried woman takes purgatives and drugs to induce
abortion. Is she morally justified to do that?

No, regardless of your circumstances, you have no right to take an unborn child's life,
whether you are the mother or not. Women who are capable of doing so are just selfish and
immoral; murdering their own children is simply not a moral thing to do. It is not merely a
fetus, but your kid that you are capable of having. And it's ironic that you'd kill your child just
to be a decent child in your parents' eyes. Some of the women who are unable to have one
are there, praying silently to God and crying their hearts out. Then you're just going to murder
yours. This is just unacceptably horrible.