Although Deontology ethical theory is classical, I like it the most because it advocates for people to adhere to their obligations rather than base an action on outcomes (Shafer-Landau 167). One reason why I support the theory is that it gives precedence to ethical naturalism. In every person, there are the set of unwritten natural laws that determine if an action is right and wrong and if the wrong choice is taken, it results in guilt or a conscience trip. These same laws are further defined within the religious and cultural values and human rights which appear to be often universal. Following these internal and external obligations will eventually result in the least type of harm unknowingly. Deontological actions further attribute to most of the widely shared intuition people have about their duties and responsibilities meaning that it has a far much effect towards people than any other form of ethical theory.
One of the objections to Kantian deontology it is not practical and would not happen in a practical world which one would need to break the norm of the right or wrong to produce a better result (Bagnoli 319). An example would be when one meets a serial killer who is targeting your friend, and the serial killer asks about your friend’s whereabouts and you have to lie to protect them. A counter to this objection would be by stating the Kant’s maxim that states, “An act is morally acceptable if, and only if, its maxim is universalizable.” (Shafer-Landau 170) Therefore, while lying would be the option that is easy to come by, applying it in everything else would prove bad. Therefore, one always has an option beyond the lying. In the example therefore one has the option to report the serial killer before they get to their friend, derail him from getting to the friend or making any other action that would prevent them from getting to your friend, but make sure that the act is one that would be applied universally to very other place.