Instruction:For your replies, choose 1 thread and describe why you think that conclusion was well justified; that is, explain what it was about how they used authority, logic, and explanation to draft a persuasive, coherent justification for their position. Did the thread’s author make you think differently about your original conclusion? If they did, explain what was most persuasive to you.
discussion board to reply too:
Mallorie Eades Promise Making and the Doctrine of ConsiderationJoshua 23:14 states, “ Behold, this day I am going the way of all the earth. And you know in all your hearts and in all your souls that not one thing has failed of all the good things which the Lord your God spoke concerning you. All have come to pass for you; not one word of them has failed “ (NKJV). This is a bible verse that I feel helps me better understand or describe why it is morally right to make and keep promises. The reason that I believe this bible verse to show me true understanding is because this verse was constantly stated around me as a child when making promises. God would never break his own promise to his people and that is why we shouldn’t either to our own people. Promises are something that are not taken easily.
Is it morally right to keep promises? Morally, yes it is. Promises are something that should be spoken from the heart while also proving that you are not to break such a promise due to its importance to you. Anyone that breaks a promise will constantly live with the guilt and idea of immorality.
Why do you believe the court in Mills V Wyman refused to enforce a promise in that case, despite the court’s belief that it was immoral for Mr. Wyman to break his promise? I personally believe that the courts dismissed such a promise as he did it without the thought of legal consequences. Many do not understand that promises can in fact be brought into court if not upheld with major legal consequences. Mr. Wyman seemed as a man that was in distress, so the courts decided to not enforce such a promise as many would do the same if in that situation. Mills V Wyman states, “The moral obligation of a parent to support his child is a sufficient consideration for an express promise” (Mills 1825). I feel as if this statement should be shown as I fully agree with the statement that any parent of moral obligation should be considered for an express promise. An express promise typically means that it should be in writing or within a contract. Wyman did in fact put his promise in writing.
Do you think it was justly decided or not? Personally, I see this case in two different ways. At first Mr. Wyman was a thoughtful father who wished for the health of his son to be restored while also promising to repay the debt it caused. Secondly, he was also just a father who was concerned and did not think about the repercussions. I believe that the courts did and did not justly settle this case. I feel as if they were sympathetic to the father, but at the same time they should have made him keep his promise as it was put into writing.
References:
Joshua 23:14 – Bible Gateway. (n.d.). https://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/Joshua 23:14.
Mills V Wyman (Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts 1825). https://casetext.com/case/mills-v-wyman