Ethics: Considering Deontological Arguments of Ethics, to what extent do the strengths and weaknesses demonstrate the plausibility of this argument as a guideline for moral decision making?

Deontological arguments follow the Kantian notion, of the same name, that identifies that actions should be performed because they wrong or right in themselves rather than the consequences they procure. Immediately, Deontology affords itself the pitfalls of consequentialists theories as indeed, our actions do not and cannot always produce the predicted consequences. As such, it is sufficient to consider Deontology as a plausible guideline for moral decision-making as it enables morality to finds its holding in the consciousness and the possession of a soul that Kant adamantly proposes through his categorial imperatives. Kant's Categorical Imperative perpetuates the idea that an action is an unconditional requirement that exerts its authority in all circumstances. This categorical imperative is suggestive of a conscience which then makes it plausible to consider this argument as a sufficient guideline for moral decision-making as it draws heavily on the Judeo-Christian ideologies of a soul, finding much footing amongst religious believers. Alternatively, there is a clear flaw here as the argument rests heavily on the notion of religious belief and falls victim to the critique that ethics is only based on religion.