11.5.3 Nuclear War (AQA GCSE Religious Studies A (8062))
Revision Note
Written by: Glenn Millington
Reviewed by: Bridgette Barrett
Consequences of Nuclear War
What is Nuclear War?
A nuclear war is a war that involves nuclear weapons. These are weapons that work by creating a nuclear reaction which devastates huge areas and kills large numbers of people
Since nuclear weapons were first used in 1945 by the U.S.A. on Japan, they continue to be developed
It is estimated that in 2015, nine nations had around 15,700 nuclear weapons between them
These bombs can be delivered from land sites or submarines rather than dropped from aircraft. Intercontinental ballistic missiles have a range of up to 10,000km
What are the consequences of Nuclear War?
Nuclear weapons, along with chemical and biological weapons are known as weapons of mass destruction because the damage they can do is devastating
Nuclear weapons cause immediate destruction of all life and structures within their range. The radioactive ‘fallout’ has long-term effects
Nuclear weapons were first developed during World War 2. In August 1945, America dropped an atomic bomb on Hiroshima, Japan killing 84,000 people
Three days later they dropped another atomic bomb on Nagasaki, killing 40,000 people. After this, the Japanese surrendered bringing an end to the war
The hydrogen bomb is 1000 times more powerful than the atomic bombs dropped on Japan,
The neutron bomb can kill or disable people while leaving buildings intact
The consequences of a nuclear war would be catastrophic for the area it was used on but also for the earth as a whole
The sheer number of people that would be killed, the destruction of towns, villages and countryside and the number of people whose lives would be changed forever
Nuclear war would force thousands of people to leave their homes and often their countries as well
The people would become refugees, people without a home
War and especially nuclear wars would destroy homes, crops, power supplies, industry, schools and hospitals
Nuclear weapons lead to radiation in the air, water and soil. It can have a disastrous effect on the environment
War can scar the people involved in many ways.
Soldiers who have witnessed terrible atrocities may suffer trauma as a result
Civilians whose daily lives have been shattered can suffer in a similar way
Nuclear War and the Sanctity of Life
Nuclear weapons are weapons of mass destruction and therefore it is impossible to guarantee that innocent individuals will not be killed
Most Christians are against weapons of mass destruction and would destroy these weapons so they can never be used
It is a fundamental Christian belief that as the creator, only God has the authority to end a life that he has created. This is known as the Sanctity of Life
One of the Ten Commandments states ‘You shall not murder’ (Exodus 20:13) Some Christians believe that the use of nuclear weapons which would kill huge numbers of innocent civilians can never be justified
The use of nuclear weapons does not fit with the Just War Theory because the force used is not proportional and innocent civilians are attacked
Jesus taught Christians to 'love their enemies' and so clearly the use of nuclear weapons is wrong
Muslims would also be against weapons of mass destruction because of the Qur'an and the teachings of the prophet Muhammad (pbuh)
Muslims believe that God created all life on earth and that Muslims have a duty and responsibility to care for them and to work for peace
Life is sacred, and using weapons which could kill millions of people and possibly destroy the earth goes against the teachings of Islam
The Qur'an says ‘Take not life that God has made sacred’ (6: 151) meaning that Muslims also believe in the Sanctity of Life and would therefore condemn life being taken by anyone
The Qur'an encourages Muslims to avoid destroying lives
‘Do not contribute to your own destruction with your own hands, but do good, for God loves those who do good’ (2: 195)
In conventional warfare, innocent civilians must be protected, but with nuclear weapons, this is not possible
The use of nuclear weapons goes against the idea of proportionality and not attacking civilians found in the concept of Lesser Jihad
‘Fight in God’s cause against those who fight you, but do not overstep the limits’ (2: 190)
Attitudes to Nuclear War
Attitudes towards nuclear war
Most religious and non-religious people are against the use of nuclear weapons, although some people believe that they can act as a deterrent to prevent war
There are many arguments for and against countries having nuclear weapons
Advantages of having nuclear weapons | Disadvantages of having nuclear weapons |
|---|---|
As nuclear weapons have the potential to destroy the earth, this prevents one country from attacking another with them as they could be destroyed as well | They deliberately target innocent civilians and this would go against the conditions of a Just War and a Holy War |
Many believe that they have already prevented wars because the consequences would be too great | Nuclear weapons are so powerful they threaten world extinction |
It could be argued that from a utilitarian perspective, there is a benefit to them. For example, the nuclear bombs that ended the Second World War may have prevented more deaths had the war continued | These weapons are uncontrollable once released, nothing can stop them from spreading from outside the original target area |
Nuclear weapons could be used to defend a country against an aggressor | Nuclear weapons would destroy lives, and the environment and can never be justified |
Worked Example
Explain two contrasting religious beliefs about nuclear weapons
In your answer you must refer to one or more religious traditions
[4 marks]
Answer
Most Christians believe that nuclear weapons are wrong and should be destroyed. They believe this because they believe that life is precious and sacred, a gift from God (sanctity of life) and using these weapons would destroy lives and also that gift (2 marks)
Some Christians believe that nuclear weapons are wrong but that they can help to keep the peace because they act as a deterrent. They believe this because Jesus said, 'Blessed are the Peacemakers' and so this would be following these teachings (2 marks)
Examiner Tips and Tricks
It is possible that you will have to evaluate the use of nuclear weapons or weapons of mass destruction
For example, a 12-mark question might look like this
'It is wrong for any country to have weapons of mass destruction'
Evaluate this statement
In your answer you:
• should give reasoned arguments in support of this statement
• should give reasoned arguments to support a different point of view
• should refer to religious arguments
• may refer to non-religious arguments
• should reach a justified conclusion [12 marks]
In your response, you should consider the religious and non-religious arguments for both sides of the argument and reach a reasoned conclusion
Some of the possible arguments in favour of the statement include
If used, weapons of mass destruction may kill thousands of innocent people and wildlife and cause immense suffering
If weapons of mass destruction are used, the conflict may escalate and destroy the planet so they should be destroyed
Weapons of mass destruction are hugely expensive and it is unlikely that they will ever be used so there is no point in having them
Accidents could occur which could have a devastating impact, etc.
The use of these weapons goes against the Christian / Muslim view of the sanctity of life and therefore should never be used
They kill innocent people and the bible says, 'You should not kill'
Jesus said, 'Blessed are the peacemakers' and using nuclear weapons is never peaceful
Some of the possible arguments against the statement include
Weapons of mass destruction may serve as a deterrent and help to prevent war
Countries that possess weapons of mass destruction can be considered to be safer than those
withoutThe existence of nuclear weapons and weapons of mass destruction has kept the peace in
Europe since the end of WW2As the technology to make them exists, the clock cannot be turned back to ‘uninvent’ them
The 'Mutually Assured Destruction' of using the weapons means that nobody will ever use them anyway
Last updated:
You've read 0 of your 5 free revision notes this week
Sign up now. It’s free!
Did this page help you?
