Homosexuality

Page 1

Background and Introduction

•In

1967 the UK decriminalised homosexuality.

•In

Scotland this wasn’t until 1980.

•In

1974 the process of removing homosexuality from the list of mental health

disorders began; this wasn’t complete until 1986.

Page 2

Biblical and Christian Views

Biblical quotes:

"You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination." - Leviticus 18:22

"26 For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. 28 And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper." - Romans 1:26-28

Roman Catholicism

•Believe that it is not a sin to be

homosexual but it is a sin to act on those feelings.

•They believe that people do not

choose to be homosexual, but is a trial, and

should commit themselves to chastity.

•The Roman Catholics hold these

beliefs not only due to Bible teachings but also due to their beliefs that our

purpose is to procreate, homosexuals can’t, so it must be wrong.

Traditional Christianity

•Traditional Christians are against homosexual acts, “ you shall not lie with a man as

a woman: that is abomination.” Leviticus 18:22. Due to other similar beliefs in

the Bible, homosexual acts are now classed as sinful.

•Traditional

Christians have even gone so far as to try and ‘cure’ homosexuals.

Liberal Christianity

•Liberal Christians believe that homosexuality is not a major

moral issue.

•See that if God did make humans in

his likeness then He made both heterosexuals and homosexuals, so both are

equal.

•If homosexuals have good, loving

relationships, like some heterosexuals do, then it should be viewed with the

same respect and worth.

Protestant Christianity

•Believe

that homosexuality is wrong and should not be acted upon.

•However,

they are less homophobic than Christians and Catholics as they still believe

that homosexuals have ‘individual sacred worth’.

ØMoral

law – to do with what is intrinsically right (pleasing to God) and wrong

(displeasing to God).

ØCeremonial

law – laws relevant only to the people of Israel, to protect them and to set

them apart from other nations.

If the prohibition of

homosexuality belongs to ceremonial law, then gay sex is fine for Christians

now. If it belongs to moral law, then it is in a different category!

St.

Thomas Aquinas explained that there are three types of biblical precepts:

moral, ceremonial, and judicial.

Moral

precepts are permanent, having held even before the Law was given, since they

are part of the law of nature.

Ceremonial

precepts (ceremonial law) deal with

forms of worshipping God (burnt offerings, incense etc.) and with ritual

cleanness (what to do if one had touched a dead body).

Judicial

precepts were concerned with keeping order in society (e.g. the regulations

concerning building six cities of refuge for those who killed their neighbour

unintentionally – Deuteronomy 19). Both

the ceremonial and judicial came into existence only with the Law of Moses and

were only temporary. The ceremonial commands were "ordained to the Divine

worship for

that particular time and

to the foreshadowing of Christ". Accordingly, upon the coming of Christ

they ceased to bind. To observe them now would, Aquinas thought, be equivalent

to declaring falsely that Christ has not yet come, which for Christians is a

mortal sin.

Jesus

never mentioned homosexuality, or specifically condemned it. However, in his discussion of divorce,

(Matthew 19) he refers to the creation mandate:

“Haven’t you read,” he replied,

“that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’ 5 and

said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to

his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? 6 So

they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together,

let no one separate.”

For

conservative Christians, the prohibitions against homosexuality belong to the

moral law. They have not become outdated and still apply universally.

Page 3

Utilitarianism

•Utilitarianism

attempts to promote the freedom of choice, the freedom to express ones self and

to be liberal, as long as it doesn’t cause harm to others. (Mill’s Harm

Principle.)

•Being

homosexual doesn’t cause harm to others so therefore Utilitarianism would not

discriminate against homosexuality.

Contemporary utilitarians argue that there is nothing morally wrong

with homosexuality. PETER

SINGER (2009) wrote an article called ‘Homosexuality is not immoral’. He

concludes: “Countries should not outlaw an

activity that is morally neutral.

No

sexual activity is moral or immoral in itself; it depends on its effects.”

Jeremy

Bentham wrote Essay

on Paederasty (anal sex). His work is the first

known defence of the homosexual act. It was written in 1785, but not published

until after his death. He

argued that homosexual practices do not harm society and do not lead to the

break-up of family life.

In

On

Liberty John Stuart Mill wrote that some things are

morally neutral but when performed in public would be in bad taste. Thus the

law ought to ban homosexual acts in public places, but not in the privacy of

your own home.

Criticisms

of utilitarianism on homosexuality

1. There is no such thing as public or

private morality - PATRICK DEVLIN (1905-1992), argued that it was impossible to

distinguish between was performed in a

public place and what was done in private. He argued that many moral wrongs

take place in the home, e.g. domestic violence.

2. The philosopher H.L.A. HART

(1907-1992) argued that there were 2 different theories of law – legal

paternalism and legal moralism. He argues that the law should not interfere in

the morals of individuals (legal moralism) but that it should interfere to protect

the vulnerable (legal paternalism). He regards homosexual acts as applicable

here. He argues that young and vulnerable people need the protection of the law

when it comes to homosexuality.

Page 4

Kantian Ethics

•Kant believes that we should only

do something if it can be universalised, however, this is not very possible

with sexuality. And isn’t very realistic.

•However, he does believe that as

long as we are not using someone as a means to an end and both parties are

consenting then sex is acceptable if married.

•He thinks two people should only

have sex when they are married. He

believes only people who can make such a long term commitment to each other

deserve to have sex. Therefore homosexuals can only have sex when married and

must refrain if they are not (the same applies to heterosexuals).

Kant

(influenced by NML) argued that homosexuality is wrong. He wrote that

homosexuality was a CRIMINE CARNIS (a crime of the flesh); it degrades human

beings below the level of animals.

Kant

regarded all sex outside of marriage as a means to an end rather than an end in

itself. This includes homosexuality (which was legal at the time in his native

Prussia). Marriage is a permanent commitment while extramarital affairs are

unstable. Some argue he would have had a

different attitude to homosexuality within the legal framework of a marriage.

ALAN

SOBLE, in Kant

and Sexual Perversion,

doubts this, because homosexuality fails to cross the hurdle of an aspect of

the Categorical Imperative: the law of universalisability.

If

everyone were to become homosexual the population of the world would decline to

zero. The human race would have committed mass suicide. As a result, Kant’s

theory maintains that homosexuality is morally bad.

Criticisms

of Kantian approach to homosexuality

1.ARTHUR SCHOPENHAUER (1788-1860)

considered what he called the paradox of homosexuality. He claimed that

homosexuality is a means of preventing greater evils, e.g. the birth of

unwanted children.

2.Others note that Kant was celibate;

he never married. If Kant’s rule was applied to celibacy then, as with

homosexuality, the whole human race would disappear – problem of universability.

3.Does the all human beings have a

duty to marry and reproduce? In a world of over-population this may seem an

immoral suggestion. Modern philosophers have therefore found it hard to create

a strong case for using Kant’s ideas when dealing with homosexuality. They

often appear contradictory.

Page 5

Natural Law

•We should all aim for our telos. As

its based on Catholic views, Natural Law believes we should all aim to

procreate.

•Aquinas believes that sex should

only happen for the purpose of procreating but that it can be pleasurable.

•As homosexual sex can never produce

a child it is therefore not acceptable for homosexuals to have sex.

Page 6

Situation Ethics

•Situation

ethics believes that every situation is different and that all the best routes

of action are individual.

•One rule cannot be applied to all.

•Fletcher

would approve of homo-sexual sex if love and commitment where evident.

Page 7

Virtue Ethics

•We should all aim for human

flourishing, we can virtuously develop through sex. As it promotes love,

friendship, companionship, faithfulness, commitment and trust. So sexual

intimacy and investing time in another person makes you more virtuous.

•Therefore both heterosexual and

homosexual sex is acceptable as long as it is virtuous.

Page 8

Relativist Ethics

•We

all ought to conform to the expectations of our culture.

•So if

a culture didn’t hold homophobic beliefs then, homosexuality is acceptable.

•However,

if a culture is homophobic then homosexuality would not be acceptable.

Page 9

Other Views

Michael Foucault

argues in his book, The History of Sexuality, that sexual identity is a socio-cultural and psychological construct; a

bourgeois invention that was developed for the benefit and propagation of that

class. How

is this played out? The importance of legitimate heirs – vital for the transfer

of property, titles and even kingdoms. Therefore, is marriage merely a

way of preserving power, and homosexuality

therefore a threat.